Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2020-01-07 o s t• CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES V 0 January 7, 2020 OREGO� 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Studebaker called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:36 p.m. on January 7, 2020, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Manz, Kohlhoff, Nguyen, O'Neill, LaMotte, and Wendland Staff Present: Martha Bennett, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder; Shawn Cross, Finance Director; Erica Rooney, City Engineer; Stefan Broadus, Assistant City Engineer; Paul Espe, Associate Planner; Jenny Slepian, Sustainability and Management Analyst; Scot Siegel, Planning and Building Services Director Others Present: Christine Lewis, Metro Council; Martha Schrader, Clackamas County Board of Commissioners; Stephen McMurtrey, Housing Authority of Clackamas County 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Studebaker led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. COUNCIL BUSINESS 4.1 Election of Council President Mayor Studebaker moved to nominate Jackie Manz for Council President. Councilor Wendland seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff, Nguyen, O'Neill, LaMotte, and Wendland voting `aye'. Councilor Manz abstained. (6-0) City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 13 January 7, 2020 5. PRESENTATIONS 5.1 Metro Update Metro Councilor Lewis thanked the region's voters for passage of the recent Parks and Nature bond measure, hailing Clackamas County voters' strong support. With accompanying slides, she presented an update of priority issues at Metro: Parks and Nature. Projects in Clackamas County would receive funding through the bond measure, which would also support achievement of regional equity and diversity goals. She highlighted the City's opportunity to access "local share" funds and noted the first-ever investment specifically in trails afforded by the bond. Affordable Housing. Significant progress by the Housing Authority of Clackamas County and Metro was reported since passage of the November 2018 Metro bond. She discussed the regional goal of creating 3,900 permanently-affordable homes sufficient to house 12,000 people and the commitment to including family-sized units. Transportation. Background and status of the Southwest Corridor process was updated. With design and engineering continuing, completion of the final environmental impact statement was expected in 2020. Funding discussions also were continuing; a 2020 regional transportation ballot measure was a likely source, and Metro was also pursuing federal match funds and State funds for the Southwest Corridor light rail. Also in regard to a 2020 transportation measure, the Metro Council had been focused over the past year on regional investment to address increased congestion and ongoing safety issues. She described a regional task force that had just presented proposed investment corridors; next they would explore Tier 2 projects, which might include Highway 43. While the Metro Council expected to reach a conclusion on the possible ballot measure by spring or early summer, there was still opportunity for public input, the next being a hearing at Metro on January 13. Garbage and Recycling. With the changing markets for recycling, Metro had developed RecycleOrNot.org, an educational tool for reducing contamination in the waste stream and ensuring a valuable recycling product. In terms of system investments, she reviewed Metro's investigation of opportunities to expand capacity of the greater-Portland garbage and recycling system. In addition to needs on the West Side, she identified a focus on improvements for Metro South, including potential opportunities related to the transfer station in Oregon City. Reporting on expansion of food-scrap policy adopted across the region, she thanked the City for its leadership in recycling through local businesses. Community Placemaking. This grants process helps communities to address challenges and opportunities through arts-based and equity-focused projects. She encouraged City Council members to use their networks to raise awareness, and provided details of the annual grant cycle, including eligibility and access information. Oregon Zoo. As one of the Metro visitor venues contributing to the region's vibrancy, the Zoo had opened a Pacific lamprey exhibit in the fourth quarter of 2019. She credited a new partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla reservation, for making it a reality. Councilor Kohlhoff commended Councilor Lewis for the high quality of her work at Metro and described her effectiveness in numerous settings. Councilor LaMotte discussed background of congestion issues on Highway 43 and other streets in Lake Oswego, asking if any funds designated for study of Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge feasibility were now available for study of Highway 43. Councilor Lewis explained that some funds remained. However, based on the scope of their allowed use and now-anticipated need for additional funds elsewhere, this would not be a source for addressing Highway 43 issues. Noting the growing urgency of those issues, Councilor LaMotte asked about any source of funding that could be available sooner than later from passage of a potential transportation bond. Councilor Lewis indicated that study funding was essentially not available until about the same time as the first bond funds might be accessed, City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 13 January 7, 2020 i.e., third quarter of 2021. In responding to additional questions from Councilor LaMotte, she emphasized the need to ensure discussion of Highway 43 was part of the Tier 2 process. 5.2 Clackamas County Affordable Housing Commissioner Schrader described the critical need for additional affordable housing in all areas of Clackamas County, which currently has available only 41% of the units required to meet residents' needs. Strategies were being developed by the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners, including public-private partnerships and new collaborative efforts with local jurisdictions. In seeking sustainable strategies, the Commissioners were focused on identifying ongoing revenue streams; with the decline in federal funding, local solutions were a priority. She expressed thanks to Metro for the bond funding that would provide $116 million to create housing for some of the County's most vulnerable residents; this would be at an average annual cost of $60 to Clackamas County homeowners over the next 30 years. After describing the extent of the housing crisis in the County and elsewhere, she discussed initial steps being implemented to ensure the County meets the seven-year deadline for committing the bond funds; project readiness was a key priority. In addition to developing the housing, County Commissioners were committed to addressing the continuum of housing needs, including "wrap-around" services. Mayor Studebaker asked if, given the high cost of land, expansion of the urban growth boundary (UGB) had been considered as an option. Commissioner Schrader opined that this was a matter for discussion by the Metro Policy Advisory Committee. In her view, there was a need to balance the concept of increased density with desire for single-family homes; however, possible UGB expansion should be considered because land availability was a major issue. Councilor LaMotte congratulated the County on completion of the veterans' housing project and asked about current availability there. Commissioner Schrader provided background on successful efforts that had culminated in opening the new facility in Oregon City. She advised that it was already fully occupied, and described other opportunities being explored for housing of veterans. Mr. McMurtrey, Director of Housing Development with Clackamas County, confirmed that the County's implementation plan must be aligned with core values laid out in Metro's bond framework. He discussed how the$116 million for affordable housing development would support and advance those values. (1) Racial equity: strong focus on culturally-specific partnerships for the housing, including design and construction work, outreach and housing services, and ongoing operations by management companies, followed up by ongoing reporting of outcomes. (2) Use of the $116 million for purchase of land: opportunities both for construction of new units and purchase and/or renovation of existing housing to ensure long-term affordability. (3) Redevelopment of the Housing Authority's existing public housing portfolio, representing 55% of the bond resources: Opportunities involving sites in Oregon City and Milwaukie, $12 million coming soon for site acquisition and redevelopment elsewhere, among others. With forthcoming release of the first Notice of Funding Availability, the County would be making available the first portion of funding ($40 million) and requesting proposals for construction projects. Up to 120 vouchers for site-based rental assistance were allocated for the units, as well; this underscored the Housing Authority's focus on working with individuals at zero to 30°/0 of area median income. He noted that their minimum goal for use of the Metro bond funds was to provide 812 new units, of which 406 would be family-sized, with two or more bedrooms. A set-aside granted by Metro would allow the Housing Authority to use 10% of the resources to serve households in the 61- 80% range of area median income; this created an opportunity for other residents facing continuing pressures of housing affordability. At least 333 units would be designated for extremely low-income families, i.e., earning 30% or less of area median income. In its local City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 13 January 7, 2020 implementation strategy, the agency was retaining a provision for first-time homebuyer opportunities that Metro had put forward. He touched on other opportunities for different types of housing that were being discussed. In concluding remarks, he discussed efforts in pursuit of supportive housing opportunities, both for their new developments and over the long term. Housing choice was an important overall priority, he observed; tenant stability was greatest when residents had a choice of housing types in the areas where they wanted to live. Therefore, developers and jurisdictions with available sites for affordable housing an all areas of the Clackamas County were strongly encouraged to contact the Housing Authority. 6. CITIZEN COMMENT • Sandy Intraversato, 13464 Atwater Lane Ms. Intraversato noted that she had been one of a large group of neighbors who had commented on the Woodmont Park project at the December 3, 2019, Council meeting; their intention had been to slow the process and generate further dialog, possibly with involvement of more neighbors. Council's decision to put the project on hold had not been the outcome expected. At this point, her concerns were that (1) the issue of Woodmont Park remained unresolved and (2) there had been a regrettable fracture in many relationships as a result of comments at the meeting. In its aftermath, the priority of removing invasive species had been identified; this was discussed in a subsequent meeting of Parks and Recreation Director Ivan Anderholm, Ms. Intraversato, and a Parks Board colleague, she reported. A group of neighbors from the original committee had then met, and City Council members had recently been sent a letter. It conveyed the points of consensus reached by that group and asked Council to authorize Parks staff to resume discussion with them. The group wished to build on the work already done and to re- engage with the community, with the goal of doing what was right for the park in the long term. • Scott Bullard, 14130 Taylors Crest Lane Mr. Bullard spoke as Forest Highlands Neighborhood Association (NA) co-chair, affirming his support for Ms. Intraversato's comments, specifically to "unlock" the project and allow it to move forward. The NA appreciated Council's serious consideration of individuals' concerns. The NA's hope was to get the project back on track, possibly including some options not part of the recent proposal. He highlighted the importance of completing the project on the site and drew Council's attention to the letter recently sent. Additionally, he commended Mr. McMurtrey's achievements with both Northwest Housing Alternatives and the County. His expertise would serve the City well in framing an affordable-housing project to be integrated into the Clackamas County plan, and Mr. Bullard encouraged Council to pursue this. Councilor Wendland asked about the process Council might use to renew discussion and move forward on the Woodmont Park project. Ms. Bennett suggested that staff could confer at a break in the meeting and then offer a recommendation at the end of the agenda. • Charles Ormsby, 170 Birdshill Road, Portland 97219 Mr. Ormsby, co-chair of the Birdshill NA/CPO, expressed concerns about scheduling and other matters related to proposed revision of the Citizen Involvement Guidelines; he was not comfortable with aspects of the neighborhood planning process itself, he indicated. Regarding the presentation of Metro Councilor Lewis, he discussed concerns about two Metro projects: (1) Redefinition of the term "capacity ratio"; the City Council should investigate this. (2) Transfer of City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 13 January 7, 2020 ODOT highways to local jurisdictions. As to issues of affordable housing, he discussed his focus on handicap accessibility for housing and other facilities in Clackamas County. In regard to transportation, he noted the value of Google Maps plus codes as a resource. Council also was cautioned about the concepts being promulgated for location of high-speed rail. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7.1 Ordinance 2836, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Amending LOC Article 24.02 Transient Lodging Tax, Requiring Transient Lodging Intermediaries to Register, and Collect and Pay Over Transient Room Taxes, and Related Amendments. Mr. Powell reviewed the Ordinance title and outlined the hearing process as shown in the agenda. Staff Report Mr. Cross indicated that Ordinance 2836 was a follow-up to Ordinance 2815, approved by Council in July, 2019, to allow short-term rentals (STRs) of non-traditional housing in Lake Oswego. As detailed in the Council Report, proposed Ordinance 2836 would enact City code changes that would be a first step in ensuring effective collection of transient room taxes for such rentals by implementing the State legislature's 2018 decision (HB 4120) regarding obligations of transient-lodging intermediaries that collect the rental charges, such as Airbnb. Responding to questions from Mayor Studebaker, Mr. Cross clarified that the proposed code would direct the intermediary to collect the applicable taxes and them pay them directly to the City. This would make the code consistent with the State's requirements and would also enable the City to contact the intermediary to move the new process forward. To date, he noted, no tax collections had been received from any of the City's 22 registered STRs. Councilor Wendland asked about other jurisdictions' success in receiving payment from intermediaries after enacting the necessary policies. He reported that it was working effectively, and confirmed that the proposed code amendment was largely a housekeeping item. Mayor Studebaker asked about anticipated cooperation of the intermediaries in furnishing identifying information on STRs to the City. Through discussion with other jurisdictions of size comparable to Lake Oswego's, Mr. Cross did not deem the intermediaries to be a cost-effective source of that information. It also was not necessary as the State was having good success in collecting the tax. In response to Councilor LaMotte's questions, he affirmed that the City's records would identify the licensed STRs; the related code afforded a means of penalizing unlicensed operators. In additional discussion, Councilor LaMotte indicated some of the 22 licensees were concerned about payment of the tax. He suggested that if this Ordinance was passed, staff should hold an outreach event to acquaint operators with mechanics of the procedure. Councilor Nguyen opined that the process made perfect sense as the purpose of the intermediary for STRs, e.g., Airbnb, was to make it easier for homeowners to operate effectively and in compliance. With the business license required and passage of this Ordinance, the City would have the necessary pieces in place. Mr. Cross confirmed that the City had experienced no problems receiving the tax from hotel stays in the City where intermediaries, e.g., Travelocity, were involved. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 13 January 7, 2020 Testimony Mayor Studebaker asked if anyone wished to testify in favor of the Ordinance; no requests were heard. He asked for any testimony in opposition; hearing none, he closed the hearing. Councilor Manz moved to enact Ordinance 2836 amending LOC Article 24.02 to require transient lodging intermediaries to register, collect, and pay over transient room taxes. Councilor LaMotte seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Manz, Kohlhoff, Nguyen, O'Neill, LaMotte, and Wendland voting `aye'. (7-0) 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS 8.1 Resolution 19-63, A Resolution of the Lake Oswego City Council, Acting as the Lake Oswego Public Contracting Review Board Pursuant to ORS 279A.060, Approving a Special Procurement of a Contract Amendment for Program Management, Engineering Design and Construction Management Services Relating to the 2018- 2021 Pavement Management Program, and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Contract Amendment Ms. Rooney noted that staff's presentation was in response to the Council's December request for a cost analysis of the construction-management component of the proposed contract amendment with consultant Murraysmith relating to the 2018-2021 Pavement Management Program. The requested analysis was to compare the cost of this component as proposed by Murraysmith with a scenario where the City would hire in-house staff to perform these functions. To supplement information provided in the Council Report, Mr. Broadus reviewed slides, beginning with a cost breakdown of the four major projects comprising the program. The related total cost would be $1.7 million as proposed by the consultant. Based on staff's estimate, the in- house scenario would require hiring of six employees; this would closely mirror the personnel level proposed by the consultant and would have a total cost of $3.5 million over the three-year project period. Construction management performed by the consultant therefore was estimated at a cost $1.8 million less than with in-house personnel. The cost differential, he explained, was attributable to the seasonal nature of the work. Unlike the consultant, the in-house option would have linear year-round costs for the City. Therefore, staff's recommendation was to approve Resolution 19-63. Mayor Studebaker moved to approve Resolution 19-63. Councilor O'Neill seconded the motion. Councilor LaMotte questioned elements of the cost-benefit analysis (Council Report, Attachment 2). He asked about the roles of current City staff and their availability to perform some of the construction management work, as opposed to hiring six new employees. In addition to the office-space item, he requested an explanation of the assumptions used for cost of salaries. Mr. Broadus explained that the fully-loaded salaries estimate was based on new hires at mid- grade per the current labor agreement. In general, he noted, the low end of ranges was used for in-house costs, possibly an aggressive approach, e.g., in calculating the number of new hires needed. Ms. Rooney stressed the extensive amount of concurrent project work that would be underway at multiple locations in the summer. In further responding, she described heavy workloads of the City's information specialists and the SWAT-team approach planned for City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 13 January 7, 2020 managing communications. She and Mr. Broadus distinguished the role of Joel Komarek, project director in the Engineering Department, from this project's construction management. They explained the use of a 2.4% multiplier for benefits, administrative overhead, and the like; this was applied to the mid-grade salary amounts and was consistent with the City's usual practice. In response to Councilor Kohlhoff's request, staff affirmed her understanding of the calculation method for in-house salary costs. While recognizing the significance of meeting capacity challenges during certain periods, she indicated it was hard to justify the cost for six months'work. At Councilor Wendland's request, Ms. Rooney further clarified in-house salary cost. She then described how the consultant approach provided the City with flexibility in a cost-effective manner. Mr. Broadus confirmed that $1.7 million was the appropriate amount for comparison to the $3.5 million in-house option for construction management; the remainder of the $3.8 million amendment amount was largely attributable to design costs, he indicated. Councilor Manz inquired about the percentage of pavement-preservation work related to slurry seal, and Ms. Rooney estimated it to be 50% in 2020 as measured in street miles. With regard to project status, costs, and other reporting from Murraysmith, Mr. Broadus described the extensive information provided to staff through the weekly progress meetings once active construction was underway. Ms. Rooney emphasized the value of the recordkeeping system developed with Murraysmith, which provided important detail for the project in progress and also for long-term reference. She confirmed that this information could be made available to Council via a web page link, as suggested by Councilor Manz. Councilor Nguyen requested clarification of the responsibilities and cost for the construction management services as compared to those for the construction contractor and the project in total. Ms. Rooney discussed the ongoing City process of assessing pavement conditions and the complexities of prioritizing needed work, in balance with projects in progress. This process is being managed through the consultant's construction management services, eventually culminating in their presentation of plans and specifications for the selected construction work. The City's expenditures in pursuit of improved pavement condition over the past two-and-a-half years reflected that about 25% was for the construction management piece, i.e., planning and development of plans and specifications, a ratio typical of such projects. In addition, the continuity of Murraysmith's services offered consistency that benefited the construction bid process, which was set to be underway in four to six weeks, she advised. Councilor Nguyen asked about the possibility of saving design and engineering expense by utilizing a paving contractor's expertise rather than Murraysmith for specific street segments. Ms. Rooney and Ms. Bennett indicated that this was not typically done for a project of this type. Councilor Nguyen noted that a 25% premium seemed hefty; although it was in line with other projects, he expressed his hope that the City would aspire to make more efficient use of resources than to settle for 25%. Councilor LaMotte questioned the need for spending about half of the $1.7 million construction management amount for inspection of slurry seal, based on his understanding that it was a comparatively simple process. Mr. Broadus discussed the high level of public outreach required because of the house-by-house involvement in slurry seal work areas. The inspection process itself involved specific requirements; with the aggressive scheduling for this project, the number of street segments involved each day would be significant, requiring close monitoring. Regarding potential concerns about layoffs after three years, Councilor LaMotte noted that the pavement management program would be ongoing for the City; he asked if the long-range view had been considered in assessing cost-benefit of in-house staff versus consultant. Ms. Rooney clarified City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 13 January 7, 2020 that the current level of funding for paving could not be expected over the long term. This program was a "blitz" phase, focused on specific improvement in pavement condition, and was funded through earlier bonding. It was of a finite amount, and the money available afterward would be similar to pre-program levels, perhaps $2 million a year. In responding to Councilor Kohlhoff, Ms. Rooney confirmed that, as discussed in the Council Report, the City could hire in-house staff to work specifically for a period of three years. Mayor Studebaker initiated further discussion on the motion. His view was in favor of approval because the special procurement would enable the City to spend about half the amount of money as for the in-house option. Councilor Manz raised concerns about a significant delay in the program if Resolution 19-63 was not adopted at this time. Ms. Rooney indicated that a minimum delay of one year could be anticipated, noting hiring challenges in the current market. While Councilor Manz questioned the cost for oversight of slurry seal work, she believed the opportunity cost of a delay should be considered. Councilor Nguyen concurred that a delay at this point would be undesirable; however, in future projects he hoped that the design-build option could be explored as an opportunity for cost savings. Ms. Rooney and Ms. Bennett clarified allocation of the $3.8 million special procurement in response to additional questions from Councilor LaMotte. He commented on earlier discussion of the importance of providing cost- benefit analyses to guide Council. These needed to be provided to Council in a timely manner, he indicated, to ensure optimum decision-making. Councilor Wendland recognized that time was relevant to the matter now before Council. However, longer lead times and more background would enable Council to better understand and support staff with large contracts in the future. A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Manz, Kohlhoff, Nguyen, O'Neill, LaMotte, and Wendland voting `aye'. (7-0) 8.2 Ordinance 2834, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel Consisting of 0.44 Acres at 5995 Carman Drive; Declaring City of Lake Oswego Zoning Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from Certain Districts (AN 19-0006). At the Mayor's request, Mr. Espe presented highlights of the two annexation proposals as detailed in the Council Reports for Items 8.2 and 8.3. Councilor Wendland moved to enact Ordinance 2834. Councilor Manz seconded the motion. Mr. Espe confirmed Councilor LaMotte's understanding of the situation with this annexation request, which was based on the owner's desire to connect to City sewer service and to divide the property. Councilor LaMotte described it as the inefficient "classic cherry stem"; Mr. Espe noted that it was the only way the property could be annexed at this time. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Manz, Kohlhoff, Nguyen, O'Neill, and Wendland voting `aye'. Councilor LaMotte voted 'no'. (6-1) City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 13 January 7, 2020 8.3 Ordinance 2835, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego Three Parcels, and the Adjacent Public Right of Way, Consisting of 1.7 Acres at 6244 Washington Ct; Declaring City of Lake Oswego Zoning Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from Certain Districts (AN 19-0007). Councilor Wendland moved to enact Ordinance 2835. Councilor Manz seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Manz, Kohlhoff, Nguyen, O'Neill, LaMotte, and Wendland voting `aye'. (7-0) 8.4 Compliance with State Plastic Bag Laws Ms. Slepian reviewed background of the City's Ordinance 2806 to prohibit distribution of single- use plastic bags, which took effect July 1, 2019, as discussed in the Council Report (p 1-2). With passage of the State legislature's HB 2509, effective January 1, 2020, local jurisdictions' checkout bag policies were largely preempted by the State requirements. A key exception was that local jurisdictions were allowed discretion to charge a higher fee for paper bags than the five cents prescribed in HB 2509. With LOC Chapter 26 now requiring a 10-cent fee for paper bags, there was much confusion in the retail community, she reported. Recognizing this, staff had queried all other cities with existing plastic-bag bans about their response to HB 2509 (Report, p 3); essentially all cities would be conforming to the State's minimum of five cents. She outlined three options for Council consideration (p 3). Though staff recognized that the 10-cent fee had changed consumer behavior, the challenges of compliance for Lake Oswego retailers operating in multiple jurisdictions was a concern. Her recommendation now was to amend Chapter 26 and retain the City's language to enable possible future change to the penalties or bag fee, while reducing the current bag fee to five cents, i.e., Option 3. Councilor O'Neill expressed support for Option 2, based on Council's thorough consideration of the 10-cent fee and its demonstrated effectiveness in changing behavior. He was not convinced of the wisdom of the legislature's decision, and suggested that Council show leadership and maintain the 10-cent fee. Discussion ensued about anticipated impacts on stores, both larger and smaller than 10,000 square feet in size; Ms. Slepian noted potential complications of what could be essentially a two-tiered system. In response to questions from Councilor Nguyen, she clarified the requirements pertaining specifically to restaurants under the new State law. Councilor Manz concurred with Councilor O'Neill about some concerns regarding HB 2509, including aspects of enforcement. She would support Option 2 to continue the City's leadership and to sustain the desired change in behavior. Discussion followed about permissibility of applying the 10-cent requirement only to the larger stores as opposed to all stores. Mr. Powell noted that the State law now required smaller retailers to charge the five-cent bag fee, but that the City might have the option to require a 10-cent fee for the larger ones. It was not possible, however, to retain the City's ordinance language; it must be exactly like the State's language, with only the differences in bag fee amount and penalties allowed. He offered to check the language to verify that there wasn't a State requirement for a uniform fee across all sizes of retail stores. While valuing Lake Oswego's trendsetting role with the 10-cent fee, Councilor Wendland disliked it as reinforcement of the City's reputation as an expensive place to do business, among other disadvantages. Particularly with the many small local retailers, the 10-cent fee would be confusing; it would also require extensive education that the City could ill-afford. He advocated keeping it simple, and would support Option 3. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 13 January 7, 2020 Councilor LaMotte initiated discussion of the best option for a small-business owner, with Councilor Nguyen contributing insights. The positive effect of the 10-cent fee on consumer behavior was important to him, and it also reflected the community value of concern for the environment. While the five-cent difference in bag fee might reinforce the anti-business stigma of Lake Oswego, he did not consider it a significant deterrent. Councilor Kohlhoff indicated her support for conforming to the State law. This would allow the City to avoid issues and would make the policy understandable to all parties. Mr. Powell clarified that different fee amounts depending on size of retail operation might not be a viable change to City code under the State law, and that he would need to do further research if Council wished to pursue the possibility. Mayor Studebaker moved to adopt Option 3. Councilor Wendland seconded the motion. Following additional discussion, a roll call vote was held, and the motion failed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff and Wendland voting `aye'. Councilors Manz, Nguyen, O'Neill, and LaMotte voted 'no'. (3-4) Councilor LaMotte moved to amend LOC Chapter 26 to include identical definitions, restrictions, and requirements as HB 2509 as required, while maintaining the 10-cent bag fee. Councilor Nguyen seconded the motion. In clarifying discussion, Councilor LaMotte indicated that the motion pertained to all retailers regardless of size. Councilors Wendland and Nguyen offered their perspectives on the impact of the five-cent difference in bag fees. Ms. Slepian responded to additional questions from Council, detailing specific requirements and considerations pertaining to various types of retailers, including restaurants and certain categories of stores. Following a brief Council exchange, a roll call vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Manz, Nguyen, O'Neill, and LaMotte voting `aye'. Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Kohlhoff and Wendland voted 'no'. (4-3) 9. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Studebaker noted two corrections to be made to Consent Agenda items. (1) Item 9.5: The December 5, 2019, Special Meeting Minutes required a change on Page 2, Paragraph 4, whereby the word Transportation will be changed to Tourism. (2) Item 9.6: Exhibit B to Resolution 20-03, Page 2, did not include the name of the 2020 representative to the Metro Policy Advisory Committee. Theresa Kohlhoff will be listed as the representative. Upon approval by Council, the final minutes and exhibit would reflect these corrections. Mayor Studebaker announced that Item 9.3 had been removed from the Consent Agenda. 9.1 Ordinance 2832, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) for the Purpose of Clarifying and Updating Various Provisions (2019); and, Adopting Findings (LU 19-0033). Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2832. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 13 January 7, 2020 9.2 Ordinance 2838, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Amending LOC 15.06.610 to Adopt the 2019 Oregon Fire Code Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2838. 9.4 River Intake Pump Station Upgrades Contract Award (WO290) Motion: Move to award a public improvement contract to Stellar J. Corporation in the amount of $584,500 for Work Order 290: River Intake Pump Station Upgrades. 9.5 Approval of Meeting Minutes November 19, 2019, Regular Meeting Minutes December 5, 2019, Special Meeting Minutes Motion: Move to approve minutes as written. 9.6 Resolution 20-03, A Resolution of the Lake Oswego City Council Making Council Liaison and Committee Assignments for 2020 Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 20-03. END CONSENT AGENDA Councilor Manz moved to adopt the Consent Agenda with the exception of Item 9.3. Councilor O'Neill seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Manz, Kohlhoff, Nguyen, O'Neill, LaMotte, and Wendland voting `aye'. 7-0) 10. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 9.3 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Self-evaluation and Transition Plan Contract Award In response to an inquiry from Councilor LaMotte, Ms. Rooney clarified that the evaluation to be performed under the proposed contract pertained to the new city hall building. Apart from architectural issues, it would review the ADA transition plan for issues of accessibility, e.g., audio services in Council Chambers. Although it was a relatively minimal effort, it had been recommended by the consultant as a means of confirming that the plan was comprehensive and consistent. Mayor Studebaker moved to award a Personal Services contract to MIG, Inc. in the amount of $192,632 for the preparation of the City's ADA Self-evaluation and Transition Plan. Councilor Manz seconded the motion. A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Manz, Kohlhoff, Nguyen, O'Neill, LaMotte, and Wendland voting `aye'. (7-0) City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 13 January 7, 2020 11. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL Councilor LaMotte raised the issue of making Parks staff available to citizens wishing to move forward on Woodmont Park, stressing that timing was important. Ms. Bennett asked about code requirements in relation to parks planning, in light of the public process recently concluded. Mr. Siegel differentiated elements of parks planning, indicating that the proposed Woodmont project had received conditional use permit approval from the DRC for the proposed facilities master plan. Ms. Bennett expressed concern that the Woodmont-area residents who commented earlier in the meeting were expecting a quick re-start to the project, which she did not consider realistic. Councilor LaMotte contended that the group's intent was instead to refine the plan and expedite implementation in the new year. In ensuing discussion Mr. Powell distinguished the land use and facilities plan approval aspects described by Mr. Siegel from the City's role as property owner. Owing to the complexity involved, Council might wish to forego a snap decision in directing staff now; rather, should Council consider directing Parks staff or City management to begin the process of reviewing a different kind of plan for Woodmont? Ms. Bennett voiced concerns about convening this smaller group following the multi-year process and recent strong objections received recently via email. Councilor Wendland, noting the stakeholder communication issues and lack of consensus, supported renewal of staff dialog; he asked how to move the planning process forward. As an alternative to legislating the decision in this forum, Ms. Bennett recommended that Council ask the Parks Board to take another look at the project and propose a way to "kick-start" the planning process. It was important that it engage more than only those people who had met subsequent to the December 3 Council decision, she emphasized. Councilor LaMotte reiterated their interest in refining, rather than starting the process over, and their focus on limited concerns, i.e., restroom and invasive species. Time was of the essence for this long-awaited project. Councilor Kohlhoff was not supportive of expediting this project and at this time did not wish to direct the Parks Board in any way. Impacts of a potential initiative petition in May was a concern in relation to this park, she indicated. Councilors LaMotte and Wendland commented further about the need to move forward sooner rather than later. Mayor Studebaker called for a show of hands to determine if Council wished to ask the Parks Board to take another look at the project and see if they could get consensus on what people wanted to do. Mayor Studebaker and Councilors O'Neill, Manz, Kohlhoff, and Nguyen indicated that they supported doing so. In additional Council discussion of the charge to the Parks Board, Ms. Bennett articulated it as: to see how they can modify the design for Woodmont Park to address neighborhood concerns. 12. REPORTS OF OFFICERS This agenda item was not addressed. 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Studebaker adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:56 p.m. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 13 January 7, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 4y rye Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder Approved by the City Council on February 18, 2020. Kent Studebaker, Mayor City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 13 January 7, 2020