HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2001-01-16 Lake Oswego
City Council
ReyAct, Meeting of
ackhuAv.) i (pf 2001
LAS-o,LAK[oswF CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, January 16, 2901
aik, - 6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers
City Hall
380 A Avenue
\ --._1*-----7-c: ::70ft----;-‘---EGos--/ AGENDA
City Council Youth Council
Judie liammtrstad, Mayor Sinan Ozgur
Jack Hoffman, Council President Kristin Johnson
Ellie McPeak Sarah Ramsay
Karl Rohde Revati Patel
Bill Schoen Julia Cohen
Gay Graham Brent Berselli
John Turchi Matt Buehler
This meeting is in a handicapped accessible location. For any special accommodations,please contact
Public Affairs,(503) 635-0236,48 hours before the meeting.
!r:.zxnated Start
j ,ne
6-'X) 1. CALL TO ORDER Page t
2. ROLL CALL
., .6 3. CONSENT AGENDA
• The consent agenda allows the City Council to consider items
that require no discussion.
• An item may only be discussed if it is pulled from the consent
agenda.
• The City Council makes one motion covering all items included
in the consent agenda
3.1 COUNCIL BUSINESS
3.1.1 Appointments to Council Committees 1
Action: Accept Appointments
3.2 REPORTS
3.2.1 Proposal to ‘s iden portion of Second Street north of C Avenue 7
Action: Approve the widening of Second Street, and direct the
City Recorder to initiate the public notice process prescribed by
Section 40 of the City Charter
City Council Agenda Page 1 of 4
January 16, 2001
1111111
Estimated
-f'•
3.2.2 Boones Ferry Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Approval 15
Action: Appoint members as denoted on the attached Council
Report for the Project Advisory Committee(PAC) for the corridor
study on Boones Ferry Road from Kruse Way to Madrona Street
3.3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3.3.1 December 5, 2000, morning meeting 27
3.3.2 December 19, 2000, morning meeting 35
3.3.3 December 19, 2000, regular meeting 39
3.3.4 January 2, 2001, regular meeting 47
Action: Approve minutes as written (or as corrected if Council
adds corrections to the motion)
MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA
VOICE VOTE
END CONSENT AGENDA
4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
:15; 5. CITIZEN COMMENT
The purpose of citizen comment is to allow citizens to present
information or raise an issue regarding items not on the agenda.
A time limit o/:five minutes per citizen shall apple.
S 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
6.1 Proposal to annex one parcel at 13301 Knaus Road, consisting 51
of 2.5 acres (file AN 00-0018)
Ordinance 2280, an ordinance annexing to the City of Lake Oswego,
one parcel comprising two and one-half acres on Knaus Road (13301
Knaus); declaring City of Lake Oswego zoning pursuant to Lake
Oswego Code 49.62.1600; designating appropriate Neighborhood
Association; and withdrawing the area from the Clackamas County
Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District and the Lake Grove Fire District
(2S 1 E04BD, Tax Lot 300)(AN 00-0018)
City Council Meeting Page 2 or 4
January 16, 2001
1
Public Hearing Process:
Review of hearing procedure by City Attorney
Staff Report: Jane Heisler, Long Range Planning Manager
Public Testimony
Testimony will he taken in the following order: in support of
annexation, in opposition to annexation, neutral.
• 5 minutes for individuals
• 10 minutes for representatives of a recognized neighborhood
association, government or government agency, or other
incorporated public interest organization
(tune allowed for testimony is at the discretion of the City Council
and may change from the published time allowed for testimony)
Close of Public Testimony
Questions of Staff
Discussion
Motion: If the Council wishes it should move to enact Ordinance
2280 and authorize the City Recorder to mail the ordinance to
Metro and all necessary parties.
7. INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCILORS
This agenda item provides an opportunity for individual
Councilors to provide information to the Council on /natters not
otherwise on the agenda. Each Councilor will be given five
minutes.
7.1 Councilor Information
7.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees,
and Intergovernmental Committees
7.3 Youth Councilor Comment
6740 8. ORDINANCES
8.1 Ordinance 2287. an Ordinance of the City of'bake Oswego
amending ('hapter 20 of'the I.ake Oswego ('ode to add Article
20.07 relating to tobacco sales licenses and amending Chapter
34 of the code to add .Article 34.18 relating to smoke free
workplaces.
Motion: Move to continue Ordinance 2287 to die Special
Council Meeting of January 23, 2001 fur a Public Hearin
City Council Meeting Page 3 of 4
January 16, 2001
iimmwwwwwwwwwwilmmininimompmpowlimminenniminminummu,
Es=mated
rum
6:45 9. RESOLUTIONS
9.1 Resolution 01-02, a Resolution of the City Council of the City 75
of Lake Oswego amending Administrative Procedure No. 5
"City Council Rules of Procedure"
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 01-02
t 50 10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
10.1 City Manager
10.2 City Attorney
5; 11. ADJOURNMENT
CABLE VIEWERS: This meeting is shown live on AT&T Tualatin Valley, Channel 22, at
6:00 p.m. The meeting will be rebroadcast:
Thursday 7:00 p.m. on Channel 21
Friday 1:00 a.m. on Channel 22
Friday 10:00 a.m. on Channel 21
Friday 7:00 p.m. on Channel 22
Saturday 1:00 a.m. on Channel 22
NOTE: Videotapes of regularly scheduled City Council meetings from the first and third
Tuesdays of the month, are available for checkout at the Lake Oswego Library in the
Reference section.
City Council Meeting Page 4 of 4
January 16, 2001
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 3. 1 . 101/16/01
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: January 16. 2001
SUBJECT: Appointments to Council Committees
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to accept appointments
EST. FISCAL ATTACHMENTS: NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT:
• 2001 Council
Committee list
STAFF COST: $
Ordinance no.:
BUDGETED:
Y N Resolution no.:
FUNDING SOURCE:
Previous Council
consideration:
CITY ATTORNEY ASST. CITY MANAGER CITY IiAAAGER
itr n �
signoff/date signoff/date signoffl Late
1
K\Council\Report Covar.doc
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEES
2001
COUNCIL COMMITTEE Representative
AUDIT COMMITTEE
• Meets with staff and auditors to Bill Schoen
review annual audit John Turchi
• Usually, one meeting
• Makes recommendations to City
Council concerning auditing firms
INTERGOVERNMENTAL
COMMI"1"1'LE Representative
GROWTH MANAGEMENT CAUCUS Jack Hoffman
(REPLACES "FOCUS") Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
and Gay Graham, Alternates
LAKE OSWEGO SCHOOL Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
DISTRICT Bill Schoen, Alternate
Doug Schmitz City Mgr.
MACC (Metropolitan Area Ellie McPeak
Communications Commission)
REGIONAL ORGANIZATION ON
CRIME AND NARCOTICS (ROCN) John Turchi
CLACKAMAS RIVER BASIN COUNCIL Gay Graham
(Elected by Clackamas Cities Assn.) Clackamas Cities Representative
3
1
INTERGOVERNMENTAL
COMMIT ILL Representative
CLACKAMAS COUNTY CONCURRENCY PROJECT Jack Hoffman
STEERING COMMi i i r,n
CLACKAMAS COUNTY COMPLETE
COMMUNITIES STEERING COMMITTEE Bill Schoen
REGIONAL WATER PROVIDERS Ellie McPeak
CONSORTIUM
SOUTH FORK GROUP Bill Schoen
REGIONAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT GROUP Ellie McPeak
METRO COMMII'11✓ES Representative
METRO POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE ("MPAC") Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
Council elects Member and Jack Hoffman
Alternate Alternate
Created by Metro Charter One Member of the Council of the
Largest
City in Clackamas County (Lake Oswego)
is appointed by the City Council
JOINT POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Karl Rohde, Member
ON TRANSPORTATION ("JPACT")
By Ballot, Clackamas Cities Assoc. Alternate
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEES-2001 Page 2 '
J
WILLAMETTE SHORE LINE CONSORTIUM Karl Rohde, Member
ORGANIZATION COMMI'11 LES: Representative
(PRIVATE, NONPROFIT)
LAKE OSWEGO SISTER CITY INC John Turchi
(Open to Council and General Public)
City pays annual dues to Sister City Int'l
FRIENDS OF"i'rn v+v ILLAMETTE Karl Rohde
SHORE TROLLEY INC
(Open to Council and General Public)
(CITY COUNCILCOMMITTEES-2001 Page 3
5
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 3.2. 1
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY 01/16/01
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2001
SUBJECT: A proposal to widen a short section of Second Street north of C Avenue
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve the widening of Second Street, and direct the City Recorder to initiate the public notice
process prescribed by Section 40 of the City Charter.
I EST. FISCAL ATTACHMENTS: NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT:
None Schoening Council Report
dated December 19, 2000
STAFF COST:
None
BUDGETED: N/A
Previous Council
consideration: none
FUNDING SOURCE:
..//d/X7 -1
/4.4,1"7 • ‘ji
CITY ENGINEER ASST. CITY M AGER CITY MAOGER
/2-/70%0 / 2" (1'C1L% /o(
Date Date Date
ri
H:\RUSS_C\STREET\W I I)EN\Second Street agcnda.doc
``1y OE LAKE O"ve
Engineering Division
Memorandum
°AEGON
"I o: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
From: Mark Schoening, City Engineer
Prepared b!,: Russ Chevrette, Engineering Tech. III
Date: December 19,2000
Subject: Street widening request for Second Street north of C Avenue
Action Requested
Authorization by the City Council to widen a short section of Second Street pursuant to Section 40
of the City Charter, and initiate a public notice.
Introduction
Section 40 of the City Charter(Major Road Expenditures) requires City Council approval of any
proposed pavement widening which would exceed a finished width of 20 feet. Following the
Council's conceptual approval, the Charter requires the City Recorder to proceed with a public
notice by notifying the abutters, the neighborhood chairperson, and publishing a notice of the
decision in the local paper. The widening may not occur unless (1) it is subsequently approved by a
majority of the voters in a city election, or(2) the election is waived. If the City receives 25 or
more objections to the widening from registered City voters within 30 days of the notice, the issue
must be placed on the ballot of the next general election. If fewer than 25 objections are received,
the election is deemed waived, and widening may proceed.
This charter provision has been in effect for 25 years, but can only recall two cases' out of may
dozens that have ever drawn enough objections to prevent or scale back a road widening project.
A narrow section of Palisades Terrace in 1978,and Jean Road in 1999.
1 9
Background
This request results from the Development Review Commission's approval of a townhouse
development located at the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Second Street and C Avenue in
the First Addition Neighborhood, case file LU 00-0039. The site is identified on the attached
vicinity map. The project, known as Old Orchard Townhouses, involves making certain curb and
pavement improvements along the project's frontage on Second Street, and was conditioned to
obtain City Council approval to widen the street as prescribed by Section 40 of the Charter.
Existing Conditions
The attached vicinity map includes a photo of existing conditions. Second Street is a 22-foot wide
local street in a 60-foot wide right of way. There is no curbing or sidewalk along the subject
property's frontage, or along the adjacent property to the north. Off street parking occurs on a
poorly drained unimproved shoulder. There is a standard five-foot wide sidewalk farther north on
this block, and similar street and sidewalk improvements have been approved on Second Street in
front of a medical office building that will be built in the southeast quadrant of the intersection.
Proposed Widening
The developer proposes to improve the site's frontage by building a curb extension at the
intersection of Second and C, carrying the curb to the site's north property line,constructing new
sidewalk, street landscaping, and wheelchair ramp at the intersection (see attached site plan). The
proposed curb alignment will require filling in a 4-foot wide by 100-long gap between the existing
street edge and new curb, which triggers the Charter's public notice process. The street widening
was disclosed in the project's development application and the case file contains evidence that the
neighborhood supported the project.
Conclusion
Staff has reviewed the street widening proposal and finds that it will improve the parking,
pedestrian movements, and general aesthetics of this intersection. It is consistent with citywide and
neighborhood transportation plans, codes and specifications.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the widening of Second Street and direct the City
Recorder to initiate the public notice process prescribed in Section 40 of the City Charter.
Attachments: Vicinity map & photo, site plan
2 H)
_ i„, .,,,3„. , ......
' i
1 .t.A
■R
K.Ya,_.5 • 1 M I.
1 Add approx. 4' pavement, ., _.r,
new curb, sidewalk, street
trees Construct new curb
extension around corner,
sidewalk, wheelchair ramp
u
Proposed Street Widening:
Approx. 4' wide x 100' long, east
side of Second Street north of C
Avenue
• ' 'Od1 • b/(M •677 7 ..�.� ��_
" •
680 ti._ '...7_ 3 r•, 67. 686 -r . AVENUE N
6s •
e L LI 6,, 6,9 669 W Ks 686°6668e 6A3 92$ia �_� 69
W 66; 1-16 690 •
630 -6•3 631 637 616 Cr 659 656 660 ._ 655 1-39
6z• 629
_
6e• y 663 653 640' 1.4.7 607 670
La
519 6A61° 6e, 63664° �/ "3 639 559 /1'• •
LI
g o 0�►S_ 644 '-
-►`�" Rs - 619 . 627 W
�'S96" 7r______
c �` • tines 642 �ce
350 ^ N 60 (-7
36 se.778 3`970''1 m566 5 r AVEN ! 609
99e552 54.z 570 g97Z2 "�_.__. UE
31, 54] s60 SS6 SSSa 568 "` ;556 5
95
• 59 ^—•�—..I
1-16 59 600
LArr
s 0 531529 •
sx'".P 550 543 M N A 5� 596
f ,6
sa 513 730
it 501 525 530• 555 . u:i1. 569
• ib t ?: 53
..._, 1.0
4.. Orr4. -...1.`�1 519 N 5Di3• - qn Sg10 ?+�6! S44 Q ROi.I 11
30 SArEwA, '. "..w �. 50C1 Sp4 t~n/"7
44
�, ._ AvENUE Q�a
N 11 N 17.1
ri
4 ` 2t 167 U3
0 471 :6�..7 n
app 6
_ 1 v < h .49 460 cz 433"3 r.,.i 9
IM
M
r � 4
1- 1 .41.'1.°
41" 1 <5.0' `-�_
♦�� _ 4.26" E
l���l --_�' 26� _
(4' s:
i I
4 , , 19� 1 1i/ `, _ - 30-0'1 LOT 2 1
�y �� • 1 16315 LOT 3 1 1.898 5Q FT
Q �' P MAIN FF 2,599 50 FT 1 LOT 1 J
= W ` ' ' 2.993 SQ FT i
� � • � LOT 5 � � 1
y f 2148 SQ FT 111 �'
' 1 . 4
- _ '
ir W ' -ILOT4API ' 1
►z .�� 8 !:. 2?50 sa Ft
�f s����1 ~ r 4 161-15' < < '
•• '• , ,, 2 I z I 158.15' l''
jti �g MAIN FF q, 156-15` a Y 1
ii*,�i.� N 1 MAIN 1561 ' f
4
4/11.166LI
1 ( $HAM FF � i: 1
I ON
___________ _ .. 1.tra ta_ iii4 1 itria• ,
IR 4*
Iwo liv....1,
/ - _ I 1
*qv. 2-__ e- - i 1
e ,,)
a--_ _ ,, INORTH
)_J___Ag- PLAN - -__ _A
1 �V
-- — — , �i -- _ --_
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 3.2.2
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY 01/ 16/01
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2001
SUBJECT: Appointment of Project Advisory Committee (PAC) Membership for the Boones
Ferry Road Corridor Study
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to appoint members as denoted on the attached Council Report for
the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) for the corridor study on Boones Ferry Road from Kruse Way to
Madrona Street.
EST. FISCAL ATTACHMENTS: !NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT:
• Schoening Council Report
None dated January 2, 2001,
STAFF COST:
None Ordinance no.: N/A
BUDGETED: Resolution no.: N/A
Y N
Previous Council
FUNDING SOURCE: consideration: N/A
� r
CIT ENGINEER ASST. CITY MANAGER CITY M AGER
/cf // �✓ (
Date Date Date
• 15
H:\TOM_T\WO Boones Ferry Road Corridor Study\agenda report summary Roone8 Ferry jan 2 OO.doc
C+�1.4. LAKE ps_Cp
f
11,
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
COUNCIL REPORT
OREGON
TO: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
FROM: Mark Schoening, City Engineer/, ,
PREPARED BY: Tom Tushner, Principal Engineer
SUBJECT: Recommendation for Appointment of the Members for the Project
Advisory Committee (PAC) for the Boones Ferry Road Corridor Study
DATE: January 2, 2001
Action
The Council is requested to appoint the members of the Project Advisory Committee(PAC) for
the corridor study on Boones Ferry Road from Kruse Way to Madrona Street.
Background
A contract to study the Boones Ferry Road Corridor was awarded to Kittelson and Associates on
October 27, 2000. A PAC is being formed to provide a forum to guide the consultants and
staffs efforts. On November 22, 2000, letters were sent to nine organizations requesting
recommendations for membership on the PAC. The following list reflects the recommendations
of the nine organizations:
Organization PAC Member Nominee
Lake Forest Neighborhood Association Cathy Shroyer
Lake Grove Neighborhood Association Ed Buchman
Waluga Neighborhood Association Jeff Novack
Chamber of Commerce Jim Shires
Lake Grove Business Owners Mike Buck and
Glenda Michael (See Note below)
Clackamas County Ron Weinman
Metro Tim Collins
17
Council Report
Boones Ferry Road Corridor Study
January 2, 2001
Page 2
Organization PAC Member Nominee
(continued)
Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) Jim Kronenberg
Tri-Met Young Park
Note: The Lake Grove Business Owners have requested two slots on the PAC, Mike Buck
and Glenda Michael, please see the attached letters for further information regarding the Lake
Grove Business Owners' request.
Discussion
The PAC provides an essential forum to gather information and provide critical input on project
decisions. The nine organizations represent a cross section of the affected groups along the
project corridor. The PAC, coupled with open houses,will provide the forum for public
participation in this study of the Boones Ferry Road Corridor.
Alternatives
The alternatives are to 1) appoint the list as recommended, 2) add/delete/change specific
appointments, or 3) remove from consent agenda and discuss.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council appoint the list as recommended by the nine organizations.
Attachments
11 I111.1 1'W()Ro nto Fero,Road(o,,J.w Study\COUNCNPT[Mond Forty Jan 16 2061 doc
18
JOHN W. LUNDEEN/Attorney
4040 Douglas Way
P.O.Box 1146
1 akc Grove.OR 97035
(703)635-9393
Fax No.(503)635-1526
December 22, 2000
Tom Tushner, P.E.
City of Lake Oswego
Community Development Department
via fax: 503-635-0269
Dear Tom:
After I sent you a copy of my letters of November 29th and December 20th I received a couple
of calls. The first call was from Glenda Michael of Bank of the Northwest volunteering to be our
representative in the Project Advisory Committee for the Boones Ferry Road Corridor Study. I also
received a phone call from Mike Buck. He was volunteering,but he candidly wondered whether or
not he could be an effective representative for all of the businesses because of his somewhat unique
situation.
Mike and/or his dad Tony Gubanc will probably be the most effected by any changes on
Boones Ferry Road because they probably own the longest stretch of Boones Ferry Road running
from Gubanc's across to the end of LaProvence. Business people like Glenda,Adra and I might like
a nice wide Boones Ferry,complete with boulevard style landscaping. pedestrian and bike access,
etc.,etc. Mikc, as a property owner, would probably have some resistance, for good reason!
I think that it would be a good idea to staff the Project Advisory Committee with one non-
property owner business representative from Boones Ferry Road and with one business property
owner. I believe that Glenda Michael and Mike Buck would be great representatives of these
interests.
Sincerely.
Lundeen
JWL:jf
cc: Mike Buck
via fax. 503-699-6980
Glenda Michael
via fax: 503-417-897Q
Adra Barlow
via fax: 503-697-4503
19
.,.022 1226 '00 11:03 t D:Lake Grove FAX:503 417 • N
4
I)eaamber 20, 2000
Torn I utittner, I'.h..
('ity oI•I.ake Oswego
Community Development I)epurlalcal
FON: 503-(35-020
I) tr Rlr. •1'ushner.
I received a lax li•onl Jack Lundeen regarding the Project Advisory Committee. I urn
interested in contributing any way I can. I work 3 days a week • • Monday, 'Tuesday, and
Wednesday. Ik pciulIv your meetings will be held on one ul'those days'?
Thanks and I look tilrwurd to hearing From you soon.
Sincerely.
(ilesida Michael
Vice President, Rosiness Development
003)417-8976
cc: Jack Lundeen
W Ion..', •. I i•uy kn.lil 1.ikr 11k' '1,1114 'I11 41/ 1I'1/11 1.1% .11; 11'1."1
21
I
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 3.3
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY 01/16/01
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2001
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes from:
1. December 5, 2000, morning meeting
2. December 19, 2000, morning meeting
3. December 19, 2000, regular meeting
4. January 2, 2001, regular meeting
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Approve minutes as written (or as corrected if Council adds corrections to the motion)
EST. FISCAL ATTACHMENTS: NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT:
Minutes from:
• December 5, 2000, morning
STAFF COST: $ meeting
BUDGETED:
•
December 19, 2000, morning Ordinance no.:
meeting
• December 19, 2000, regular Resolution no.:
meeting
FUNDING SOURCE: • January 2, 2001, regular
meeting Previous Council
consideration:
CITY MA GER
/ ( (
signoff/d2't
\\F1NANCE\DATA\INFOSVC\Robyn\report minutes.doc
3.3. 1
01/16/01
MINUTES OF DECEMBER 5, 2000
MORNING MEETING
a Lw[t q�w�`O
,� CITY COUNCIL MORNING MEETING MINUTES
December 5, 2000
act
Council President William Schoen called the regular City Council meeting to order at 7:30 a.m.
on December 5, 2000, in the City Council Chambers.
Present: Councilors Rohde,Lowrey, McPeak, Hoffman, Council President Schoen and
Chizum
Excused: Mayor Klammer
Staff Present: Doug Schmitz, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
Deputy City Recorder
Guests: Judie Hammerstad, Mayor-elect
3. REVIEW EVENING AGENDA
Councilor Rohde asked for clarification on Ordinance 2279. David Powell, City Attorney,
said that a recently changed state law prohibited the recording of documents on a County deed
record unless a law specifically authorized those documents. He explained that the County
clerks had interpreted the word "law"as referring to state statutes only, which created a major
problem for jurisdictions needing to record real estate and other documents on the County deed
records. He indicated that recently County clerks had begun interpreting 'law' as including city
ordinances.
Mr. Powell said that Ordinance 2279 authorized all the documents that staff could think of as
needing recording on a County deed record for such recording. Doug Schmitz, City Manager,
observed that this had nothing to do with the Council; it was solely at the staff level.
Councilor Rohde asked that the name of anyone who spoke in the minutes be bolded each time
he/she spoke, as that made it easier to scan the minutes for a particular speaker.
Council President Schoen mentioned reading in the paper something suggesting that the City
should not pass Ordinance 2283. Mr. Powell recommended discussing the Measure 7 fix partly
in Executive Session (specific potential claims) and partly in open session (amending the
ordinance).
4. REVIEW FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilor Rohde asked if they would postpone the public hearings on sensitive lands contested
sites (scheduled for December 19), pending the Measure 7 review. Mr. Powell said that he
recommended a continuance if they were still stniggling with Measure 7. Ile mentioned that the
court decision on a preliminary injunction enjoining Measure 7 was due out tomorrow. lie
recommended, if Measure 7 was suspended, that the Council decide whether to proceed with
business as usual while Measure 7 went through the courts (taking possibly more than a year).
Councilor Hoffman asked if they could ask for Measure 7 waivers on uncontested sensitive land
sites. Mr. Powell said that he could explore that if Council was interested. Councilor Rohde
pointed out that if a sensitive land site came to Council in this manner, that meant that it was a
contested site because Council adopted all the uncontested sites at one time. Mr. Powell
commented that by the time the contested sites came to Council, the owners often no longer
contested them but the City still had to go through this process. Ile said that he would check to
see if the December 19 sites were still contested.
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page I of 7
December 5, 2000
2
Mr. Schmitz indicated to Councilor Rohde that the Council quarterly update was scheduled for
December 19.
Mr. Powell referenced his memo relating a conflict Councilor Hoffman had with respect to the
Field Turf issue and Bones Construction. He said that he did an analysis of what was required in
terms of declaring a conflict when a Councilor's law firm represented a party suing the City,
even though the Councilor himself did not represent that party. He noted that Oregon ethics law
required Councilor Hoffman to declare an actual conflict of interest and step down from
participation in the Council discussions and decision.
Mr. Powell discussed the lawyer's code of professional ethics, which prohibited a lawyer privy
to confidential information as an elected official from using that information or representing a
private client in connection with the matter. He recommended that Councilor Hoffman declare a
conflict of interest at the beginning of every meeting and not participate, either on or off the
record. He further recommended that staff notify Councilor Hoffman in advance when the
Council intended to discuss the Field Turf issue, and that staff not send Councilor Hoffman any
materials relating to the issue, clearly labeling those materials as not sent.
Mr. Powell asked the Councilors and staff to refrain from discussing this issue with Councilor
Hoffman. He recommended putting the Field Turf discussion scheduled for this meeting off to
the end of the meeting in order to allow Councilor Hoffman to leave.
Councilor Hoffman said that the appearance of impropriety was an important consideration for
him. He indicated that he did not want to give Bones Construction any reason to criticize the
City if it did not receive a favorable outcome in a lawsuit.
S. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Council President Schoen recessed the meeting at 7:43 a.ni. to Executive Session pursuant to
ORS 192.660(1)(h), for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding
current litigation or litigation likely to be filed, and (1)(f), to consider records exempt by law
from public inspection (December 2, 2000, confidential memo from legal counsel). Mr. Powell
reviewed the Executive Session parameters.
6. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
Council President Schoen reconvened the open session at 8:17 a.m.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Powell said that he would present the Measure 7 ordinance as drafted, unless he heard
otherwise from Council. Mr. Schmitz mentioned that staff could do actual costs as opposed to a
set fee.
Councilor Chizum asked why the property owner had to provide a list of all property owners
within 300 feet, as the City already had that information. Mr. Powell said that the City typically
required applicants in land use proceedings to obtain a current list of property owners from the
County, and then the City mailed the notices.
Councilor Hoffman observed that the written requirements were typical and well known to most
planners and lawyers in the business. Ile held that the professionals would be able to meet the
written requirements easily. Mr. Powell concurred, noting that if the claim ended up in
litigation, the applicant would need that information anyway.
Councilor Chizum asked if Mr. Powell thought that all the claims coming in would require
litigation. l le pointed out that it made no sense for a claimant to spend $5,000 up front on
attorney fees in order to get $10,000 from the City. lie questioned requiring all 'this legalese'
for minor claims. Ile commented that he thought it would take a $25,000 claim to trigger hiring
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 7
December 5, 2000 7 b
N
a lawyer. Mr. Powell indicated that he did not think that the process required a lawyer, although
citizens might think so.
Councilor Chizum referenced Councilor Hoffman's point that the lawyers knew how to meet
the requirements. He observed that the average citizen did not. He held that a citizen should not
need to hire a lawyer to pursue a minor claim. He questioned making the process so hard that the
average citizen could not pursue his claim on his own. Councilor McPeak concurred, asking if
they would be keeping people from exercising their rights. Council President Schoen
mentioned leaving it open for negotiations without going to litigation.
Councilor Lowrey stated that he discussed his idea for a two-step process with Mr. Powell and
Mr. Schmitz. He suggested requiring a smaller fee for the first step, in which a citizen presented
his/her claim to staff with sufficient information for staff to determine the eligibility of the claim
under Measure 7. If the City Manager found the claim ineligible due to the federal exception
rule or something else, then the claim stopped at the first step before getting into the onerous
requirements and expense of the ordinance as written.
Councilor Lowrey described Measure 7 as the people establishing a remedy for government
regulating their land. He argued that the City should not set up such an onerous process with a
$3,000 threshold fee and deposit, plus attorney fees on top of that, which the average citizen
would not be able to handle.
Councilor Lowery stated his opinion that most claims would fall out of the process quickly
because they fell under some exception. He argued that a two step process provided a first step
for handling the majority of the claims and a second step (as outlined in the ordinance) for those
claims which the City Manager determined as eligible under Measure 7; the City could then
require the additional fee and the appraisal.
Councilor Chizum suggested implementing Councilor Lowrey's suggestion by inserting a
sentence authorizing the City Attorney or City Manager to waive the fees in certain situations,
such as claims resolved without coming to the Council.
Councilor Lowrey encouraged staff to use a mediator in settling claims. He argued that the
present ordinance as drafted immediately pushed claims into litigation, as once a claimant had
invested all that time and money into his/her claim, he/she would be reluctant to let it go, even if
staff found it ineligible. He contended that they would anger fewer people if they had a step with
a smaller fee($150-$200) and the City Manager giving a good reason for denying it; they could
go into mediation if necessary to find a reasonable solution. He commented that Measure 7
claims would require public education, as the majority of claims would probably not hold up for
various reasons.
Mayor-elect Hammerstad asked a policy question: did the Council want to encourage minor
claims? She pointed out that the potential consequences of the eligible minor claims were
payment or lifting a regulation on that particular property. She observed that there was a conflict
between making it easy to make minor claims and discouraging minor claims because of the
regulatory consequences. She commented that in the conversation she did not hear that the
Council had decided if it wanted to do that.
Councilor Lowrey said that he was not talking about whether a claim was minor. lie argued
that they would not know if a claim was minor until the City saw it. 1 ie held that any claim
should go through two-step process.
Councilor Hoffman mentioned the West Linn pre-application process. lie suggested looking at
the 'Vest Linn ordinance as a way to accomplish the Council's intent without discouraging minor
claims or forcing people into lawsuits. He observed that what seemed a minor claim to the City
might seem a major claim to the homeowners.
Councilor Rohde discussed his concern with encouraging minor claims, using an example of a
property owner wanting to install a deck right to the edge of the property line (which was
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 7
December 5, 2000
29
prohibited by regulation). He held that an easy claims process could allow an owner to claim
that City regulations devalued his home by prohibiting this improvement; the dollar value of the
claim could be similar to the cost of installing the deck; the City either changed the regulation or
paid the property owner. He argued that this scenario meant that the City paid the homeowner to
put in the deck.
Councilor Chizum observed that no one wanted to encourage minor claims. l le said that they
were trying to find a process to allow a citizen with a legitimate claim to go through the process
without paying a minimum of$5,000 to start the process. He reiterated that changing the
wording to allow the City Attorney or City Manager to waive certain fees if necessary would
accomplish that. He stated that he did not think doing that necessarily encouraged more claims.
Councilor McPeak asked if staff could provide the Council with a report on Councilor Lowrey's
idea at the evening meeting. Councilor Lowrey volunteered to work with Mr. Powell to
develop the first step of a two-step process, in which staff determined the eligibility of a claim.
Fle indicated that the process outlined in the ordinance could serve as the second step.
Mr. Powell held that the biggest question in determining the eligibility of a claim was whether
the regulation actually reduced the value. He noted the question of whether or not they should
require citizens to provide the appraisal. He characterized the other information required as easy
to obtain.
Councilor Lowrey argued that Mr. Powell found the information easy to obtain because he was
a lawyer and used to working with these documents, procedures and legal analyses. He
contended that 100% of the people who were not lawyers or paralegals would find these
requirements onerous, including the $3,000 fee. He reiterated his proposal for a two-step
process, in which the City resolved most claims in Step 1. He mentioned his concern that they
not set up an adversarial relationship between the citizens and the government.
Councilor Lowrey reiterated that he was willing to try to develop a process whereby the citizens
felt better and the City could work through these claims more efficiently. Councilor McPeak
asked if there was a clear way to distinguish which claims stopped at Step 1. Councilor Lowrey
suggested that if the City Manager determined that a claim was not worth pursuing beyond Step
1, the Manager send a letter to the claimant explaining why he denied the claim. He indicated
that if the claimant chose to then pursue the matter, he/she moved into the more expensive and
complicated process.
Mr. Powell asked for clarification on what information the citizen provided. Councilor Lowrey
spoke to the claimant submitting a claim in writing, citing the regulation and giving his address
and date of property purchase. He reiterated his belief that a quick review of many claims would
reveal that the regulation was already in effect when the owner purchased the property. He
argued that that review should occur in Step 1.
Mr. Powell noted that they reached the claims stage as soon as the citizen came to the City
asking for money or release from a regulation. He reiterated the need to clarify the issue of what
information did the citizen provide and what information did the City provide. Councilor
Lowrey said that in Step I, the claimant could provide the basic information but not the
appraisals and legal analyses. He reiterated that the City Manager could easily determine
whether a claim fell under an exception or did not meet the Measure requirements, and provide
an explanation to the claimant that would not make the claimant angry.
Mr. Powell confirmed to Councilor Chizum that staff did make this ordinance an emergency
ordinance. Councilor Chizum pointed out that they could make changes to an emergency
ordinance at a later date, similar to what happened with the tree ordinance. Councilor Lowrey
argued that staff could make the changes he suggested in time tier the meeting because they
already had Step 2 in the ordinance; all they had to do was draft Step i, which he would work
with Mr. Powell on. Mr. Powell indicated that they could do that.
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 7
December 5, 2000
3U
Councilor McPeak noted that this was exactly the issue that created a lot of anger in Lake
Oswego over the tree ordinance; people paid a significant amount of money only to be turned
down. If they had known the situation earlier, they would have dropped it.
Councilor Lowrey argued that Step 1 would avoid that problem by informing the people
adequately and clearly early on without requiring them to pay a lot of money. Fie commented
that the first letter that the Manager sent denying a claim based on a federal exception became a
form letter. He spoke to setting a reasonable threshold to try to resolve claims in Step 1. If a
claim went to Step 2, then the citizen went through the requirements in the ordinance.
Councilor Lowrey concurred with Councilor McPeak that the City angered many people with
the tree ordinance, creating the potential of losing the tree ordinance because of the public angst
it generated. He spoke to ameliorating the tree ordinance so that the City could hold on to most
of it, and to doing the same thing with the Measure 7 ordinance. He reiterated that they wanted
something that worked and allowed the City to keep the regulations (which gave the community
a livable city) but did not anger the citizens.
Council President Schoen concurred with the comments made. He recommended passing the
emergency ordinance and discussing an amendment at the next Council meeting.
Mr. Powell noted that the ordinance became effective December 7. He suggested that the
Council mention at tonight's meeting that it was considering an amendment at the next meeting,
so that those interested in pursuing a claim (but not happy about the ordinance requirements)
would know that they might go through an easier process if they waited to bring their claim
forward. He spoke to having more discussion of the details of Step 1.
Councilor Hoffman said that he was not comfortable with a two-tier process because there were
too many questions. He argued that this was different from the City initiating a regulation; this
was citizens coming to the City asking for compensation. He concurred with Mr. Powell that the
citizens needed to establish that their property has been reduced in value. He held that the City
needed a professional appraisal because this involved tax dollars. He commented that he knew
of no governments that gave away local money.
Councilor Hoffman spoke in support of the ordinance as drafted. He suggested that if the
Council was interested in a small claims process, then Mr. Powell could talk with other cities
about their processes.
Mr. Powell mentioned that some cities used a hearings officer, others the City Manager; not all
claims went to the Council. He explained that staff felt that the Council would want to hear
claims for payment compensation initially. He commented that Councilor Lowrey might be
correct that, in the event the City received numerous claims, the Council might want a different
process.
Councilor Hoffman reiterated his support of the ordinance as drafted and staff looking at a two-
tier small claims pre-application process. Councilor McPeak concurred, emphasizing the need
for a Tier 1 small claims process in particular.
Councilor Lowrey argued that they could draft a simple pre-application process and offer a
proposal tonight. He spoke to starting out with a two-tier process as opposed to starting out with
`the hammer' and angering a lot of people, citing their experience with the tree ordinance. l le
spoke of offering something that the citizens could understand and that did not present the
appearance of the City throwing up a barrier to Measure 7. Lie noted that 40%of the people in
Lake Oswego voted for Measure 7.
Mr. Schmitz asked for clarification on staff direction. He noted the two directions: come back
with something tonight versus do not come back with something tonight but do come back with
something later. Councilors McPeak, Hoffman, Rohde and Council President Schoen
supported Mr. Powell returning to a later meeting with a two-tier system proposal.
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 7
December 5, 2000 :S
Councilor Lowrey stated that he would bring the idea of a two-tier system up at tonight's
meeting because he could not support the ordinance as drafted. He reiterated that he thought
staff could offer something better than the ordinance at this evening's meeting. Councilor
McPeak commented that she wanted the public to know that they were thinking through this
idea.
Mr. Powell mentioned presenting Council with options for Tier I before drafting a proposal to
see if there was consensus on what information should be required.
Council President Schoen commented that he hesitated to slam anything together tonight.
Councilor Lowrey pointed out that the Council did not see this proposal until this weekend.
Councilor Chizum observed that he had thought that the tree ordinance had been slammed
together, which some on the Council had not cared for, but they did get to change it.
Councilor Lowrey argued that the purpose of the morning meetings was to allow the Council to
do something before the evening meeting. He explained that he did support the ordinance but
not the $3,000 fee and making the initial application so onerous for the general public.
Councilor Rohde observed that no one really knew what Measure 7 would do. He argued that
an onerous application process in the first three months of figuring out Measure 7 was okay
because the claimants could wait until the Council worked out the details for a Tier I process.
Councilor Hoffman concurred that they were only talking about a 30 to 60 day wait.
Councilor Hoffman objected to the remarks characterizing the ordinance as `thrown together.'
He referenced Mr. Boone's hard work in the month since Measure 7 passed and his contributions
to the city attorney a-mail discussions, which the Councilor has followed. He said that this
ordinance was the product of 10 to 20 other lawyers working with Mr. Boone. Mr. Powell
commented that the ordinances scheduled for adoption by cities throughout the state were very
similar.
Councilor Lowrey indicated that he had assumed that the ordinance was the product of several
weeks of work. He commented that it was too bad that the Council could not have discussed the
ordinance during its draft stages two weeks ago instead of waiting to discuss it on the morning of
the night staff scheduled it for adoption. Mr. Powell explained that even a week ago the draft
was a moving target. He said that staff knew that the ordinance was a work in progress but they
felt it important to draft something to protect the City and to establish a reasonable process.
Councilor Rohde asked to postpone the Development Review Commission interviews until two
to three Councilors could be present to conduct the interviews. He noted that Councilor Chizum
was the only member of the interview committee who could make the Thursday meeting.
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Chizum that the confidential memo on smoking was for
information only, not discussion.
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Councilor Hoffman declared an actual conflict of interest with the issue of the synthetic athletic
fields because other members of his law firm represented Bones Construction Company, the
general contractor on the turf project. He stated that he would not participate in the discussion or
decision
Councilor Hoffman left the meeting at 8:55 a.m.
Council President Schoen recessed the meeting into Executive Session at 8:55 a.m. pursuant to
ORS 192.660(1)(h), for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding
current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. Mr. Powell reviewed the Executive Session
parameters.
Council President Schoen reconvened the open session at 9:05 a.m.
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 7
December 5, 2000 3 2
•
8. ADJOURNMENT
Council President Schoen adjourned the regular meeting at 9:05 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
sa4AitZi1
Robyn C stie
Deputy City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 7
December 5, 2000
33
3.3.2
01/16/01
MINUTES OF DECEMBER 19, 2000
MORNING MEETING
„ ,- ,
,,ACITY COUNCIL MORNING MEETING MINUTES
December 19, 2000
Mayor W.K. `Bill”Kiammer called the regular City Council meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. on
December 19, 2000, in the City Council Chambers.
Present: Councilors Rohde, McPeak, Hoffman, Schoen, Mayor Klammer, and Chizum
Excused: Councilor Lowrey
Staff Present: Doug Schmitz, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
Deputy City Recorder; Janice Deardorff, Human Resources Director
3. REVIEW EVENING AGENDA
Councilor Rohde asked to see a report on what the City funded with the facade grants (page 6).
Councilor Hoffman requested a before and after presentation on the facade grants. Doug
Schmitz, City Manager, indicated that staff would provide that information to the Councilors.
Councilor Rohde asked if staff could move the George Rogers Park field improvements up to
2001 (page 10). Mr. Schmitz said no, as it took a significant amount of time to do the design
work and get a project out to bid, noting that it was almost January now.
Councilor Rohde asked for clarification on the bullet under field improvements. Mr. Schmitz
explained that staff expected the work on the north field to take a year longer because of the
environmental processes and possible legal challenges brought by the neighbors (who previously
had protested the filling in of the wetland to create the field). He mentioned that six years ago
the neighbors hired a lawyer when the School District talked about installing an irrigation system
on that field.
Councilor Rohde asked to see Phil Ringle's resume, the pro tern judge. Mr. Schmitz indicated
that staff would get that to him today. In response to Mayor Klammer's query, Dave Powell,
City Attorney, commented that Mr. Ringle had a good reputation as a competent judge in
community court. Councilor Hoffman asked to see the resume also.
Councilor Chizum asked for clarification on why two of the five Forestry Commission
members did not reside in Lake Oswego. Mr. Schmitz noted that the charter for the
Commission did not specify residency as a requirement except for two positions. Councilor
Rohde commented that he thought it was three positions for residents. Mr. Powell explained
that they purposely allowed non-residents on the Commission because of the expertise required.
Mr. Powell recommended continuation of Agenda Item 7.I, the Centerpointe sensitive lands, to
March 20 because staff needed more time for resolution, and there was no rush on the matter.
The Council agreed by consensus to do so.
Councilor McPeak noted a correction to the minutes on page 81, her comments, next to the last
line: "or whatever" instead of"of whatever."
Mr. Powell recommended continuation of Agenda Item 8.1, the Hallmark findings, to allow staff
sufficient time to complete the discussions with l lallmark and resolve the issue. The Council
agreed by consensus to do so.
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2
December 19, 2000
37
4. REVIEW FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Robyn Christie, Deputy City Recorder, mentioned re-scheduling the DRC interviews. The
Council decided to do that after the first of the year.
5. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Kiammer recessed the meeting at 7:40 a.m. to Executive Session pursuant to ORS
192.660(1)(i), to consider matters related to employee evaluation. Mr. Powell reviewed the
Executive Session parameters. Mr. Schmitz and Mr. Powell left the meeting.
6. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
Mayor Klammer reconvened the open session at 8:00 a.m.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
Councilor Hoffman moved that the City Council order the following compensation
adjustments to the Charter Officers in recognition of their performance during the
calendar year 2000: City Attorney salary increase of$3,000 annually and City Manager
salary increase of$5.000 annually. Councilor Schoen seconded the motion. A voice vote
was taken and the motion passed with Councilors McPeak, Hoffman, Schoen, Mayor
Klammer and Chizum voting in favor. Councilor Rohde voted against the motion. 15-11
Councilor Hoffman moved that the Council award the following compensation adjustments
to the Charter Officer City Judge in recognition of his performance during the calendar
year 2000: participation in PERS, assuming eligibility requirements, or a cost of living
adjustment of 5%, but if the Judge comes into PERS, then it would be a 10% reduction in
his present annual salary. Councilor Schoen seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken
and the motion passed with Councilors Rohde, McPeak, Hoffman, Schoen, Mayor
Klammer and Chizum voting in favor. 16-01
8. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Klammer adjourned the meeting at 8:05 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robyn C istie
Deputy City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
City Council Morning Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2
December 19, 2000 38
3.3.3
01/16/01
MINUTES OF DECEMBER 19, 2000
REGULAR MEETING
3()
tt4Allis°
ARP CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 19, 2000
Mayor W.K. Klammer called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. on
December 19, 2000, in the City Council Chambers.
Present: Mayor Klammer, Councilors Chizum, Rohde, Lowrey, McPeak, Hoffman, and
Schoen
Staff Present: Doug Schmitz, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
Deputy City Recorder; Tom Coffee, Assistant City Manager; Jane Heisler, Project
Planner
Youth Council
Present: Brent Berselli, Matt Buehler, Kristin Johnson, and Sinan Ozgur. Revati Patel was
excused. Sarah Roxana Ramsay and Julia Cohen were absent.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor Rohde reviewed the consent agenda for the audience.
Councilor Chizum moved approval of the consent agenda with a correction to the minutes.
Councilor Schoen seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed with
Mayor Klammer, Councilors Chizum, Rohde, Lowrey, McPeak, Hoffman, and Schoen
voting in favor. 17-01
3.1 REPORTS
3.1.1 Council Goal Update
ACTION: Accept Report
3.1.2 Schedule of Athletic Field Improvements
ACTION: Accept Report
3.1.3 Award of a Public Improvement Contract for Construction of Cathodic Protection
of Raw and Finished Water Transmission Mains— Phase II (Work Order 1133)
ACTION: Award public improvement contract to Cathodic Protection Engineering, Inc.,
for $117,800.
3.1.4 Nomination of Pro-tern Judge
ACTION: Appoint Phil Ringle to serve as Pro-tem Judge
3.2 RESOLUTIONS
3.2.1 Resolution 00-88, Appointing the initial Community Forestry Commission members
ACTION: Adopt Resolution 00-88, appointing to the Community Forestry Commission
David R. Cory and Jeremy Fried for three-year terms through December 31,
2003, Don Morton and William L. Owen for two-year terms through
December 31, 2002, and Erin Wagner for a one-year term through December
31, 2001.
City Council Minutes Page 1 of 6
December 19, 2000 4 1
A
3.3 ORDINANCES
3.3.1 Ordinance 2269, an ordinance annexing to the City of Lake Oswego, one parcel
comprising.27 acres at 14100 Knaus Road; declaring City of Lake Oswego Zoning
pursuant to Lake Oswego Code 49.62.1600; and withdrawing the area from the
Lake Grove Fire District and the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol
District. (21E4DB, Tax Lot 1000)(AN 00-0016). Hearing held November 21,2000.
ACTION: Enact Ordinance 2269
3.3.2 Ordinance 2282, correcting a scrivener's error in the description of the width of the
right-of-way to conform to the area as depicted on the petition for annexation in the
Rivergrove Scholl Annexation.
ACTION: Enact Ordinance 2282
3.3.3 Ordinance 2285, correcting a scrivener's error in the legal description of Ordinance
2267, annexing three parcels to the City of Lake Oswego
ACTION: Enact Ordinance 2285
3.3.4 Ordinance 2286, granting to 360 Networks (USA) Inc., the right and privilege to
construct, operation and maintain a telecommunications system, with all necessary
facilities, in, under and over the surface of the City's streets.
ACTION: Continue consideration to January 16, 2001
3.4 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3.4.1 November 28, 2000, special meeting
3.4.2 December 5, 2000, regular meeting
ACTION: Approve minutes as corrected
END CONSENT AGENDA
4 RECOGNITION AND PRESENTATIONS
4.1 Recognition of Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (MACC) and
Tualatin Valley Community Access (TVCA) for work and contributions for the
Council Chamber Remodel
Mayor Klammer thanked Dean Gibbs, MACC Vice Chair, for the efforts of MACC & TVCA in
helping Lake Oswego obtain the $99,500 worth of camera equipment. He noted that Lake
Oswego was the second MACC community, following Tigard, to obtain this equipment.
4.2 Certificate of Appreciation, Scott Benge, Benge Construction, for work on A Avenue
project
Mayor Klammer expressed the City's and Renewal Agency's pleasure at the completion of the
A Avenue project as promised (before Thanksgiving). He thanked Mr. Benge, his employees
and subcontractors for an excellent job and presented Mr. Benge with a Certificate of
Appreciation. He noted that Mr. Benge was a resident of Lake Oswego.
7.2 Distinguished Service Award, Paula McHenry, Transportation Advisory Board
Mayor Klammer thanked Ms. Mcl lenry for her excellent work as chair and member of the
Transportation Advisory Board, and presented her with a Distinguished Service Award.
City Council Minutes Page 2 of 6
December 19, 2000
42
4
7.3 Distinguished Service Awards, Bill Klammer, Mayor; Bob Chizum and Tom Lowrey,
City Councilors
Council President Schoen reviewed Councilor Lowrey's work on Council and regional
committees since his election in 1997. He thanked Councilor Lowrey for his contributions and
presented him with a Distinguished Service Award.
Council President Schoen reviewed Councilor Chizum's work on Council and regional
committees since his election in 1997. He thanked Councilor Chizum for his contributions and
presented him with a Distinguished Service Award.
Councilor Chizum recounted how he came to run for City Council after retiring after 40 years
as a retail businessman. He discussed the extent of different subjects that he had to learn about
as a Councilor, noting that he could not participate in his original interest of downtown
redevelopment because of a conflict of interest. He thanked his wife, the City staff, the Mayor
and his fellow Councilors for their help and support. He commented that a high caliber of people
worked on the City staff, mentioning in particular Doug Schmitz, Dave Powell, Bob Kincaid,
Tom Coffee, Chris Jordan, Mark Schoening, Ron Bunch, Hamid Pishvaie, Bob Galante, Carole
Dickerson, Les Youngbar, and Phil Sample, and the third floor staff Shirley Schultz, Jane
McGarvin, Robyn Christie, Barbara Parr and Kris Hitchcock.
Councilor Chizum characterized the Council's unanimous vote on the Measure 7 ordinance as
its finest hour, and an example of seven people with different backgrounds and opinions finding
a compromise solution through discussion and debate. He advised the incoming Council to
listen to the other guy, to offer conciliatory positions on different issues and to let the other guy
win once in a while. He spoke to the Council and the community supporting the decisions of the
Council and not undermining them, as the government system did not work well without the
community support.
Councilor Chizum said that he found sitting on the Council stimulating and rewarding,
representing a new learning process for him. He thanked the community.
Councilor Schoen reviewed Mayor Kiammer's work on Council and regional committees since
his election as Councilor in 1993 and Mayor in 1997. He noted the Mayor's work with the Sister
Cities Association, his efforts to create a Youth Council and to place youth members on Boards
and Commissions, his participation in fundraisers for the Clackamas County Women's shelter
and the Adult Community Center, and his work on MACC in obtaining the Chamber's new
communications system. He thanked Mayor Klammer for his contributions and presented him
with a Distinguished Service Award, paraphrasing a frequent remark by the Mayor: `you've done
good.'
Mayor Klammer said that he shared many of Councilor Chizum's feelings. He spoke to the
excellence and dedication of the City staff to their work, noting the three charter officers in
particular. He characterized his time on the Council as bittersweet and a learning experience.
Mayor Klammer recounted an anecdote of Councilor Chizum obtaining a second tote bag at the
Philadelphia National League of Cities convention, to the dismay of those providing the totes.
lie presented Councilor Chizum with a tote bag from the Boston conference, given to him by
those providing the tote bags, upon his assurance that they would never see Councilor Chizum
again.
Mayor Klammer presented Councilor Rohde with shot glass from Boston for his collection.
7.4 Distinguished Service Award,Tom Coffee, Assistant City Manager
Mayor Klammer thanked Mr. Coffee for his 10 years of service with the City and presented him
with a Distinguished Service Award. He noted the sound advice that Mr. Coffee always gave
him.
City Council Minutes Page 3 of 6
December 19, 2000 4 3
7
Mr. Coffee commented that he has appreciated the opportunity to end his 28 year planning
career at Lake Oswego, a city that consistently supported planning and cared about the future.
lie mentioned the excellent planning staff and support from the City Manager, the City
Attorney's Office, the Councils and the Boards and Commissions.
Doug Schmitz,City Manager, quoted an old English saying: "Public service is an honorable
profession." He observed that people of Mr. Coffee's caliber made it an honorable profession.
I ie recalled a bet made between Mr. Coffee and Councilor Chizum concerning the number of
suits in stock at Mehlhaf's, a men's store in Corvallis. He presented a business card signed by
the storeowner attesting to the number of suits in stock, making Mr. Coffee the winner.
Councilor Chizum said he would pay the bet of dinner at Burton's in Corvallis.
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
6. CITIZEN COMMENT
There were none.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.1 Sensitive Lands/Contested Sites located on Centerpointe Drive, 2 Centerpointe Drive,
and a vacant parcel adjacent to 3 Centerpointe(LU 00-0080).
Councilor Schoen moved to continue this hearing until March 20, 2001. Councilor Rohde
seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed with Mayor Klammer,
Councilors Chizum, Rohde, Lowrey, McPeak, Hoffman, and Schoen voting in favor. 17-01
7.2 Proposal to annex one parcel comprising 3.6 acres at 6000 Meadows Road (AN 00-
0017)
Ordinance 2278, an Ordinance annexing one parcel comprising 3.6 acres at 6000 Meadows
Road to the City of Lake Oswego; declaring City of Lake Oswego zoning pursuant to the
Lake Oswego Code 49.62.1600; designating appropriate neighborhood association; and
withdrawing the area from the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, the
Tualatin Fire District #64 and the Unified Sewerage Agency Districts while retaining the
parcel within the Lake Grove Water District, #15, and the Lake Grove Park District. (2S2E
07BA, Tax Lot 300) (AN 00-0017).
Mayor Klammer read the hearing title. Councilor McPeak read the ordinance title. Mayor
Klammer reviewed the hearing process and testimony time limits. Dave Powell, City
Attorney, reviewed the standard land use criteria. He asked the Councilors to declare any ex
parte contacts, conflicts of interest or bias. There was none. He asked if there were any
challenges from the audience. There were none.
STAFF REPORT
Jane Heisler, Project Planner, presented the staff report. She noted the receipt today of a
Measure 7 waiver allowing the City to proceed with the annexation.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Klammer opened the hearing to public testimony. Hearing none, he closed the public
testimony.
COUNCIL QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Councilor Chizum asked for clarification on a Measure 7 waiver for this land parcel, which was
subject to the Kruse Way agreement. Mr. Powell indicated that staff requested a waiver, which
City Council Minutes Page 4 of 6
December 19, 2000 4 4
the landowner granted. He concurred that the agreement did not address Measure 7, as it
predated the measure.
Councilor Schoen asked if the City has physically received the waiver. Mr. Powell said no,
staff received a fax. He recommended that the Council adopt the ordinance subject to receipt of
the actual waiver prior to signing the ordinance.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Schoen moved to adopt Ordinance 2278, authorizing the Mayor to sign the
ordinance, provided that the original of the signed Measure 7 waiver was received within
five days, and authorizing the City Recorder to mail the ordinance to Metro and all
necessary parties. Councilor Chizum seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the
motion passed with Mayor Klammer,Councilors Chizum, Rohde, Lowrey, McPeak,
Hoffman, and Schoen voting in favor. 17-01
8. FINDINGS
8.1 Findings adopting Council decision to deny appeal of the Development Review
Commission's decision to deny a request by Hallmark Inns and Resorts to modify
Development Review Permit(AP 00-17-1399)
Councilor Schoen moved to continue this item to March 20, 2001. Councilor Chizum
seconded the motion.
Councilor Rohde asked why this item was being continued. Mr. Powell explained that staff
was entering into discussions with Hallmark that might resolve the matter and affect the
resolution. He indicated that they needed more time to work through the City's process.
A voice vote was taken and the motion passed with Mayor Klammer, Councilors Chizum,
Rohde, Lowrey, McPeak, Hoffman, and Schoen voting in favor. 17-01
9. BUSINESS FROM THE COUNCIL
9.1 Councilor Issues for Discussion
9.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental
Committees
Councilor Rohde mentioned that the regularly scheduled Joint Policy Advisory Committee on
Transportation (JPACT) meeting was cancelled due to the weather.
Councilor McPeak reported on the December 13, 2000 Metropolitan Area Communications
Commission (MACC) meeting. She said that Lake Oswego's share of the AT&T Cable Services
franchise fee for July 1, 2000, through September 30, 2000, was $42,831.53. She indicated that
Lake Oswego would receive another$7,179.02, once AT&T signed off on the MACC franchise
fee review conducted in November.
Councilor Hoffman noted that the regularly scheduled Metro Policy Advisory Committee
(MPAC) meeting was also cancelled due to weather.
9.3 Youth Council Comment
Mayor Klammer thanked the Youth Councilors for their contributions. He expressed his hope
that it has been a good experience for them and would continue to be a good experience with the
new Council.
Mr. Buehler observed that the Council Chambers looked wonderful. He thanked Councilors
Chizum, Lowrey and Mayor Klammer for their wonderful work on the Council, noting that they
would miss them.
City Council Minutes Page 5 of 6
December 19, 2000 4 5
Ms.Johnson thanked the Council for the opportunity to serve on the Youth Council,
commenting that it has been a rewarding experience. She thanked the three Council members for
their work, concurring with Mr. Buehler that they would be missed.
Mr.Ozgur thanked the three Council members. He mentioned in particular Mayor Klammer's
enthusiasm in promoting the Youth Council program at Lakeridge. He commented that he would
miss them and that he was excited to continue on the Youth Council and learn more about city
politics.
Mr. Berselli thanked the Council members for this opportunity, observing that it was a great
learning experience.
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
10.1 City Manager
10.2 City Attorney
Mr. Powell thanked Mayor Klammer, Councilors Chizum and Lowrey for their working
relationship over the past two and a half years and the support they have given him. He
mentioned their dedication and passion with respect to city issues as the factor that made
representative government work.
11. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Klammer adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
TOi3a(Neil/t6
Robyn Chb[stie
Deputy City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
City Council Minutes Page 6 of 6
December 19, 2000 4 6
3.3.4
01/16/01
MINUTES OF JANUARY 2 , 2001
REGULAR MEETING
17
/Q�LML pf\
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
N' January 2, 2001
__
Mayor W.K. Klammer called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. on
January 2, 2001, in the City Council Chambers.
Present: Mayor Klammer, Councilors Rohde, McPeak, Schoen, Mayor-elect Hammerstad,
Councilor-elect Turchi and Councilor-elect Graham. Councilors Chizum, Lowrey
and Hoffman were excused.
Staff Present: Doug Schmitz, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
Deputy City Recorder
Youth Council
Present: Brent Berselli, Matt Buehler, Kristin Johnson, Sinan Ozgur, Julia Cohen, Revati
Patel, and Sarah Roxana Ramsey
Mayor Klammer recalled his work with the sister city organization, beginning in 1993 when he
was elected to the Council. He introduced three visitors from Lake Oswego's sister city of
Yoshikawa, Japan: Hidehisa Tagai, Emissary from Mayor Tobari; Yusho Mishiama, a Buddhist
priest who hosted Mayor Klammer during his Japan visits; and Kai, a good friend. He
mentioned Mayor Tobari's wishes of luck to both the outgoing and incoming mayors, Mr.
Tagai's gift of a beaded bracelet bringing good luck and good health, and the dignity and
courtesy accorded by the residents to Lake Oswegans visiting Yoshikawa. He said that he was
deeply honored that they made this trip.
3. OATH OF OFFICE
Robyn Christie, Deputy City Recorder, administered the oath of office to Councilors-elect Gay
Graham, John Turchi, Ellie McPeak and Karl Rohde. They took their seats at the dais.
Ms. Christie administered the oath of office to Mayor-elect Judy Hammerstad. She took her seat.
Former Mayor Klammer presented Mayor Hammerstad with a beaded bracelet on behalf of
Mr. Tagai. He passed on to Mayor Hammerstad the gargantuan wooden gavel he had received as
a gift (called a Hillbilly Persuader).
Mayor Hammerstad thanked former Mayor Klammer and Mr. Tagai for their gifts. She
congratulated Mayor Klammer for leaving a legacy of the city in such good shape that it would
be a privilege for the new Council and Mayor to serve.
4. ELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT
Councilor McPeak, on behalf of the Council, nominated Councilor Jack Hoffman in
absentia to serve as Council President in 2001. Councilor Rohde seconded the motion. A
voice vote was taken and the motion passed with Councilors Rohde, McPeak, Schoen,
Mayor Hammerstad, Turchi and Graham voting in favor. 16-01
Mayor I lammerstad reassigned the seating order as follows: Gay Graham, Ellie McPeak,Jack
Hoffman, Judie I lammerstad, Karl Rohde, Bill Schoen and John Turchi.
Mayor Hammerstad thanked the audience for their attendance, those who supported them
during the election, and their families. She spoke of this as an exciting time for the new Council
to serve the community. She indicated that the first big project that the new Council would
City Council Minutes Page 1 of 2
January 2, 2001
4 9
undertake, thanks to Bill Klammer, was to sign the agreement on the Block 138 development to
create an active downtown.
Mayor Hammerstad mentioned other goals, such as the trolley becoming a true commuter
system, traffic improvements and beautification in Lake Grove,new school facilities to serve
both the children and the community as a whole, and neighborhood improvements to maintain
the livability of the finest city in Oregon. She spoke to the community working together with all
its varied interests towards common goals. She indicated that the Councilors had even higher
expectations of themselves than the community did, and that they would not let the community
down.
Councilor Graham thanked the audience for showing such confidence in the Council by
attending this meeting. She said that she looked forward to working with her fellow Councilors,
the City staff and the community. She stated that is was an honor to serve the community.
Councilor Turchi thanked those who voted for him. He characterized this opportunity as a
singular honor for him, which he was looking forward to. He recalled learning from former City
Councilor Matt Finnigan, while working on a neighborhood project, how important a good
functioning city was and how important it was to have City Councilors who listened. He
expressed his hope that over the next four years he would prove to be an asset to the city as a
good listener, partner and neighbor.
Councilor Rohde concurred that it was an honor to serve as a City Councilor in Lake Oswego,
characterizing his previous four years of service as a delight. He recognized the City staff as the
finest in the state of Oregon, observing that that became obvious as Councilors worked with
staff. He credited the staff also with making Lake Oswego the finest place to live in Oregon. He
observed that ironically he was now, at 33 years of age, the senior most member of the Council.
Councilor McPeak thanked the citizens for returning her to the dais as a real elected Councilor.
She said that she would try to live up to their confidence. She thanked those who preceded the
current Council, indicating that they would build on their accomplishments.
5. CITIZEN COMMENT
There was none.
Mayor Hammerstad reviewed the upcoming Council schedule for its goal setting retreats:
January 6 and 12 at Heritage House, January 13 at the Main Fire Station. She said that the public
was welcome to listen to the Council deliberations on setting priorities for the next year and the
next four years, although there was no public input at this time. She thanked the citizens and the
Yoshikawa visitors, expressing her hope to continue the warm relationship with Yoshikawa in
the future.
6. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hammerstad adjourned the meeting at 6:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
I
Robyn ristie
Deputy City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
City Council Minutes Page 2 of 2
January 2, 2001 r
5U
6. 1
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 01/16/01
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2001
SUBJECT: Annexation of One Parcel at 13301 Knaus Road, Consisting of
2.5 Acres (File AN 00-0018) (21 E04BD, Tax Lot 300).
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to adopt Ordinance 2280 and authorize the City Recorder to mail the ordinance to Metro
and all necessary parties.
EST. FISCAL ATTACHMENTS: PUBLISHED NOTICES
IMPACT: Heisler Council Report (Date): November 30, 2000,
dated December 29, January 4 and 11, 2001
51,653 in City Tax Revenue. 2000, with attachments
Ordinance no(s) 2280
STAFF COST:
BUDGETED: 1. Ordinance 2280 Resolution no.:
and Map
Y N 2. Natural Resources
Letter Previous Council consideration:
FUNDING SOURCE: 3. Map and Petition
DEPT. DIRECTOR ASSISTANT CITY CITY M AGER
MANAGER
// y/ 0 /
Signoff/date Signoff/date Signoff/date
Ranncxauons/AN 00-0018/Cover Memo, 13301 Knaus Road
001 5
T.
CO
j CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
i7
..ICON COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Douglas J. Schmitz, City Manager
FROM: Jane Heisler, Project Plan e ► 4
SUBJECT: Council Adoption of Ordinanc: , 80, Annexing One Parcel on Knaus
Road to the City of Lake Oswego (File AN 00-0018)(2S1 E04BD, Tax
Lot 300, 13301 Knaus Road)
DATE: December 29, 2000
ACTION:
Adopt Ordinance 2280 (Exhibit A), annexing one parcel to the City of Lake Oswego, consisting of
approximately 2.5 acres, representing $529,049in assessed value and containing no electors. The
location is shown on the map attached to the Ordinance (Exhibit I ).
BACKGROUND:
AN 00-0018 is a request by the property owners to annex in order to provide City services to the
existing dwelling and to facilitate potential future development on the parcel. The petition (Exhibit
B) has been signed by both owners. There are no registered voters in the territory proposed for
annexation. The property has an assessed value of 5529.049, is 2.5 acres and contains a single
family dwelling located on the easterly end of the parcel. The parcel is currently zoned R-20 in the
County. Upon annexation, the westerly 2/3 would be zoned City R-7.5 and the easterly 1/3 would
be zoned City R-10. The easterly portion of the parcel contains an RC Tree Grove, according to the
Sensitive Lands Atlas. A letter has been sent to the property owner informing them of this
designation and their opportunity to contest (Exhibit 2).
DISCUSSION:
At its November 21. 2000 meeting, Council passed a motion adopting a policy that, "pending a
more comprehensive review of annexations in February of 2001, the Council shall proceed with
annexations where 100% of the property owners waive any 2000 Ballot Measure 7 rights that might
arise as a result of the annexations." Staff has forwarded a Measure 7 Waiver to the property
owners. As of the date of this staff report. no signed waiver has been received.
Council Report,AN 00-0018, 13301 Knaus Road 003
Page 1 of 10
5t'
3
APPLICABLE CRITERIA:
1) Oregon Revised Statutes, Boundary Changes; Mergers and Consolidations
ORS 222.111(2) Annexation of Contiguous Territory, Authority and procedure for annexation,
generally.
ORS 222.125 Annexation by consent of all owners of land and majority of electors
2) Metro Code 3.09.040(a)(1-7) Minimum Requirements for Petitions
3.09.050 Uniform Hearing Requirements for Final Decisions
3.09.050(b)(1-5), (d)(1-5)
FINDINGS:
1. ORS 222.111(2) and 222.170 Annexation of Contiguous Territory, Authority and
procedure for annexation, generally
ORS 222.111(2) provides that a proposal for annexation of territory to a city may be
initiated by the legislative body of the city, on its own motion, or by a petition to the
legislative body of the city by owners of real property in the territory to be annexed.
ORS 222.125 permits the legislative body of the city to waive holding an election on the
question of annexation within the area proposed to be annexed if all of the owners of land in
the territory and not less than 50 per cent of the electors, if any, residing in the territory
consent in writing to the annexation. All property owners have signed a petition consenting
to this annexation. There are no electors residing on site (Exhibit 2).
2. Metro Code
3.09.040 Minimum Requirements for Petitions.
(a) A petition for a boundary change shall be deemed complete if it includes the
following information:
1) The jurisdiction of the approving entity to act on the petition;
2) A narrative,legal and graphical description of the affected territory in
the form prescribed by the Metro Executive Officer;
3) For minor boundary changes, the names and mailing addresses of all
persons owning property and all electors within the affected territory as
shown in the records of the tax assessor and county clerk;
4) A listing of the present providers of urban services to the affected
territory;
5) A listing of the proposed providers of urban services to the affected
territory following the proposed boundary change;
61 The current tax assessed value of the affected territory; and
7) Any other information required by state or local law.
The above information was submitted as required by statute. All property owners and
electors have signed the petition and their mailing addresses are stated on the petition. The
Council Report,AN 00-0018, 13301 Knaus Road 0 0 4
Page 2 of 10 5 4
providers of urban services include the Lake Grove Fire District #57, the Clackamas County
Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District, and Tri-Met. Upon annexation, police and fire services
will be provided by the City of Lake Oswego as well as surface water and sanitary sewer
service. The current tax assessed value is $529,049. The Annexation Application and
Petition are found in Exhibit B.
3.09.050 Uniform Hearing and Decision Requirements for Final Decisions Other Than
Expedited Decisions.
(b) Not later than 15 days prior to the date set for a boundary change decision,the
approving entity shall make available to the public a report that addresses the
criteria in subsection (d) and (g) below, and that includes at a minimum the
following:
(1) The extent to which urban services presently are available to serve the
affected territory including any extra-territorial extensions of service;
The Metro Code, 3.09.020 defines urban services as including sanitary sewers,
water, fire protection, parks, open space, recreation, streets, roads and mass transit.
General: This annexation includes one parcel containing a single family residence.
The property owner may propose further development in the future.
Water: The territory is within the area served by the City of Lake Oswego as a result
of the now-dissolved Forest Highlands Water District. The existing residence is
served water by Lake Oswego, which has an 8" line in Knaus Road.
Fire: The parcel is currently served by the Lake Grove Fire District, #57 through a
contractual agreement with the City of Lake Oswego. Upon annexation, the parcel
will be withdrawn from the Lake Grove Fire District and served by the City of Lake
Oswego Fire and Rescue. Response time to this parcel from the Main Fire Station is
approximately four minutes. There is a tire hydrant located at the west end of Leslie
Lane.
Sanitary Sewer: The parcel is currently served with an on-site subsurface sewage
disposal system. Future development would be served by an 8" line in Leslie Lane
which is stubbed to the easterly boundary of the subject territory.
Surface Water Management: Surface water is currently handled on site. There is an
engineered swale in Leslie Lane which drains to a ditch in Knaus Road. The westerly
half of the subject site drains overland toward Goodall Road. Upon annexation, the
property owner will pay the City's Surface Water Management Utility fee and will
be subject to the City's regulations regarding surface water.
Police: This site is currently served by the Clackamas County Sheriff. The City
currently fields approximately 1.25 officers per thousand population. The addition
of this dwelling and two residents will not impact this service ratio. The parcel will
Council Report,AN 00-(X)18, 13301 Knaus Road
Page 3of10 00 j Cr
JJ
be withdrawn from the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District as a
result of annexation and will be served by Lake Oswego.
Parks and Open Space: The City currently has 490 acres of park and open space
lands, or 14 acres per 1,000 population. National guidelines call for 353 acres for a
City Lake Oswego's size. The City has many recreation programs available to youth
and adults. In 1993, there were 19,637 participants in City recreation programs. in
1997, the City served 25,319 residents and non-residents in recreation programs.
The nearest park is Woodmont Natural Area, approximately /mile to the southeast
of the site on Atwater Road.
Transportation: Streets and Mass Transit: The site is served by Leslie Lane, a local
street. Leslie Lane is a 40' right-of-way, with two ten-foot paved travel lanes,
engineered drainage swales. There is a sidewalk on the property side of the swale on
the north side. Bus line 38 provides the nearest transit service. The nearest bus line
is Line 78 which travels between the Beaverton Transit Center and the Lake Oswego
Transit Center, generally via A Avenue, Country Club and Kerr Parkway within the
City of Lake Oswego. This transit line provides half hour service all day until 7:00
p.m. with hourly service until 11:00 p.m.
(2) A description of how the proposed boundary change complies with any
urban service provider agreements adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065
between the affected entity and all necessary parties;
The City currently has no ORS 195.065 urban service provider agreements.
(3) A description of how the proposed boundary change is consistent with
the comprehensive land use plans,public facility plans, regional
framework and functional plans, regional urban growth goals and
objectives, urban planning agreements and similar agreements of the
affected entity and of all necessary parties.
Consistency of the proposed boundary change with comprehensive land use plan
policies is discussed in section (d)(3), below. Consistency of the proposed boundary
change with the City's Public Facility Plans for water, sewer, storm and
transportation are discussed in section (d)(3), below. There are no regional
framework. regional functional plans or regional urban growth goals and objectives
that are directly applicable to annexation. Compliance with urban planning
agreements and other agreements with necessary parties is discussed in section
(d)(2), below.
(4) Whether the proposed boundary change will result in the ithdrawal of
the affected territory from the legal boundary of any necessary party;
and
Council Report,AN 00-0018, 13301 Knaus Road (, r' i'
Page 4of10 V V
56
!npummpgimm.m..m.•••....mm•=,Fmn ... .m....mgn•m......m....npnommmoommmmmmmomotomllmln.P
The parcel proposed for annexation will be withdrawn from the Luke Grove Fire
District and the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol I)istrict upon
annexation per ORS 222.520.
(5) The proposed effective date of the decision.
The proposed effective date of the decision is outlined in the final section of this
report (page 10).
(d) An approving entity's final decision on a boundary change shall include
findings and conclusions addressing the following criteria:
(1) Consistency with directly applicable provisions in an urban service
provider agreement or annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS
195.065;
The City currently has no urban service provider agreements adopted pursuant to
ORS 195.065
(2) Consistency with directly applicable provisions of urban planning or
other agreements. other than agreements adopted pursuant to ORS
195.065, between the affected entity and a necessary party;
The Metro Code defines necessary party as "a county, city or district whose
jurisdictional boundary or adopted urban service area includes any part of the
affected territory, or who provides any urban service to any portion of the affected
territory." The list of necessary parties for this parcel proposed for annexation
includes:
Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District
• Lake Grove Fire District, #57
Clackamas County
Tri-Metropolitan Transportation District
City of Lake Oswego/Clackamas County Urban Growth Management Agreement:
The City currently has an urban planning agreement with Clackamas County. This
agreement was entered into per ORS 190.003, and ensures coordinated and
consistent comprehensive plans and outlines responsibilities in providing services
and managing growth within the Dual Interest Area. The two following subsections
are applicable to annexations.
"6. City and County Notice and Coordination:
The City shall provide notification to the County, and an opportunity to
participate, reN iew and comment, at least 35 days prior to the first public
hearing on all proposed public facilities plans, legislative changes to the
City Comprehensive Plan, or quasi-judicial land use actions adjacent to
or in close proximity to unincorporated areas. '1 1w ('ity shall provide
Council Report,AN 00-0018, 13301 Knaus Road
Page 5of 10 007
57
notice to the County of private or City initiated annexation requests
within five days of the filing of an application with the Portland
Metropolitan Boundary Commission."
This policy specifies that the City notify the County of an annexation request
within five days of when it is submitted to the Boundary Commission. The
Boundary Commission no longer makes boundary decisions within the
Portland metropolitan area. Staff relies on the notice requirements of Metro
Code 3.09.030, which requires notice 45 days prior to the scheduled hearing
for an annexation for all necessary parties. The County is a necessary party
under the Metro Code definition and, therefore, has been notified.
"7. City Annexations
A. The City may undertake annexations in the manner provided for
by law within the Dual Interest Area. The City annexation
proposals shall include adjacent road right-of-way to properties
proposed for annexation. The County shall not oppose such
annexations.
B. Upon annexation, the City shall assume jurisdiction of the County
roads and local access roads pursuant to a separate road transfer
agreement between the City and County."
The City is undertaking this annexation in the manner provided for in the
applicable ORS and Metro Code for these territories which lie within the
Dual Interest Area. The separate road agreement referenced in 7(B) is now
expired. Transfer of roads from County to City is now done by mutual
resolution on a case by case basis pursuant to ORS 373.270.
Lake Grove Fire District #57/City of Lake Oswego Agreement. The City and the
District entered into this agreement in 1997, providing fire and basic life support
emergency medical service to the Lake Grove Fire Protection District area. The
agreement does not address annexations. Annexation will result in withdrawal of the
parcel form the Lake Grove Fire District. The City will then provide fire and rescue
service.
(3) Consistency with specific directly applicable standards or criteria for
boundary changes contained in the comprehensive land use plans and
public facility plans;
a► Comprehensive Plan Map
The parcel is currently designated Low Density Residential on Clackamas County's
Comprehensive Plan Map, with a zone of R-20. The City's Comprehensive Plan
Map shows this parcel as Low Density Residential as well. Upon annexation, a City
zone of R-7.5 will be applied to the westerly approximately 340 feet and a zone of R-
10 will be applied to the easterly approximately 160 feet. The City and County have
coordinated and compatible Comprehensive Plans within the "Dual Interest Area"
Council Report,AN 00-0018, 13301 Knaus Road
Page 6of 10 008 58
outlined in the City/County Urban Growth Management Agreement (dated February
4, 1992 and updated November 18, 1997), hence the City/County designations have
been determined to be compatible. Therefore, this annexation is compatible with the
City's Comprehensive Plan map.
The City's Public Facilities Plan calls for a pathway on one side of Knaus Road to be
completed in the 11-20 year planning period. This annexation is compatible with the
City's Public Facility Plan in that this pedestrian facility has been planned in
anticipation of achieving the densities outlined on the Comprehensive Plan Map.
121 Comprehensive Plan Policies:
Goal 14, Urbanization
10. The Urban Services Boundary is Lake Oswego's ultimate growth area
within which the City shall be the eventual provider of the full range of
urban services.
The parcel proposed for annexation lies within the City's Urban Services Boundary
as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, annexation of this parcel is in
compliance with this policy.
13. Ensure that annexation of new territory or expansion of Lake Oswego's
Urban Service Boundary does not:
a) Detract from the City's ability to provide services to existing City
residents: and,
There are two additional residents and 2.5 additional acres to be served upon
annexation.
Police: The current ratio of number of police officers to population is 1.25
police officers per 1.000 population. The potential addition of this dwelling
and two residents to the existing population of more than 35,000 will not
detract the City's ability to provide police protection to the existing City
residents. The parcel is currently included in the Clackamas County
Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District and will be withdrawn from this district
upon annexation.
Fire: The nearest Fire station to serve this site is the Main Fire Station, with
a response time of approximately four minutes, which is within the goal of an
eight minute minimum response time stated in the Comprehensive Plan. The
potential addition of this 2.5 acre parcel and two residents to a City
comprised of over 6400 acres will not detract from the Fire Department's
ability to provide fire protection to existing City residents.
Parks: As previously noted, the City currently has 490 acres of park and
open space lands, or 14 acres per 1,000 population. The nearest park is
Council Report,AN 00-
Page
0 0018, 13301 Knaus Road
Page7of10 009
59
•
Woodmont Natural Area, a City-owned natural area, approximately 1/4 mile to
the southeast of the parcel. The potential addition of this parcel and two
residents to a community of 35,000 population will not degrade the ability of
the existing City residents to utilize the park system.
Recreation: The City has many recreation programs available to youth and
adults. In 1997, the City served 25,319 residents and non-residents in
recreation programs. Persons participating in the recreation activities pay a
registration fee. The potential addition of two residents would not degrade
the recreation programs because the additional usage would result in
additional revenue to address the additional demand.
Sewer and Water: The parcel to be annexed currently is served by a
subsurface sewage disposal system. The parcel is served water by the City of
Lake Oswego. Water service would continue after annexation and would not
degrade the ability of the City to provide sewer and water services to its
existing City residents. The City has an established system development fees
and imposed rates which result in payment by users for the sewer and water
systems. Any additional demands will be addressed through the additional
revenue, and thus sewer and water services will not be degraded by the
addition of two new residents in a community of more than 35,000.
The City's Public Facilities Plan (PFP) for sanitary sewer services includes
this area, but does not show any sanitary sewer projects within the pl,uuling
period in the immediate area.
The City's Public Facilities Plan for water includes the Forest Highlands area
in which this parcel is located. The PFP does not include any water facility
projects in the 20 year planning period in this immediate area.
h) Result in property owners paying for urban services which do not
benefit their property.
This policy addresses assuring that existing City property owners do not
subsidize newly annexed areas in the provision of urban services. The newly
annexed parcels will pay for police, fire, administrative and park services
through property taxes. In 2000/2001 the assessed value of this parcel is
$529,049. The City's current tax rate of$5.0353/$1,000 less the amount that
is currently paid to Lake Grove Fire District ($1.91/$1,000 in assessed value)
results in additional net rate of$3.1253 for total City taxes of approximately
$1,653. Additional future development would increase assessed value and,
therefore, tax revenue for services. Therefore, existing City residents will not
be paying for urban services which do not benefit their properties, as the
newly annexed parcel will pay for needed services in a manner comparable to
those paid by existing City residents for their services.
Council Report. AN 00-0018. 13301 Knaus Road
Page 8 of 10 0 1 0
60
14. Prior to the annexation of non-island properties, the City shall ensure
urban services are available and adequate to serve the subject property
or will be made available in a timely manner by the City or a developer
commensurate with the scale of the proposed development. Urban
Services consist of water,sanitary sewer, surface water management,
police and fire protection, parks, and transportation including; streets,
transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
LODS 14.020 requires that all development be provided the following utility
services: sanitary sewer, water, sidewalks, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
traffic control signs and devices, street lights, streets, and TV cable. Some of
these utilities are now in place to serve the existing structure, however, some,
including street lights and pedestrian facilities, are not. In the event future
development occurs, an applicant for development is obligated to construct
all necessary public facilities. LOC 49.58.1415.
As noted above,police and fire services are available upon annexation. The
amount of protection provided will be similar to protection provided to other
City residents because the proposed annexation area is not isolated from other
areas of the City and will therefore receive similar service.
(4) Consistency with specific directly applicable standards or criteria for
boundary changes contained in the Regional Framework Plan or any
functional plan.
'('here are no Regional Framework Plan or functional plan criteria or standards
applicable to annexations at this time.
(5) Whether the proposed change will promote or not interfere with the
timely, orderly and economic provisions of public facilities and services.
This annexation should neither promote nor interfere with the timely, orderly and
economic provisions of public facilities and services as discussed above. When and
if additional development occurs on the parcel, provision of public facilities and
services must occur.
CONCLUSION:
Staff concludes that the proposed annexation of this parcel on Knaus Road complies with all
applicable state statutes and Metro code requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of AN 00-0018.
Council Report, AN 00-0018, 13301 Knaus Road 0 1 1
Page 9 of 10
61
EFFECTIVE DATE:
a. Effective Date of Decision to Annex. Pursuant to Metro Code 3.09.050(j), the
effective date of this annexation decision shall be immediately upon adoption. unless a
governmental entity that qualifies as a"necessary party" under Metro Code 3.09.020(1) has
contested this annexation, in which event this annexation decision shall be effective on the 10th day
following the mailing of this ordinance by the City Recorder to Metro and to all necessary parties
who appeared in this proceeding.
b. Effective Date of Annexation Ordinance. Pursuant to Lake Oswego City Charter,
Section 34, this ordinance shall be effective on the 30th day after its enactment.
c. Effective Date of Annexation. Following the filing of the annexation records with the
Secretary of State as required by ORS 222.177, this annexation shall he effective upon the later of:
1. the 30th day following the date of adoption of this ordinance; or
2. the date of filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State;
provided however that pursuant to ORS 222.040(2), if the effective date of the annexation as
established above is a date that is within 90 days of a biennial primary or general election or after
the deadline for tiling notice of election before any other election held by any city, district or other
municipal corporation involved in the area to he annexed, then the effective date of the annexation
shall be delayed until, and the annexation shall become effective on, the day after the election.
EXHIBITS:
1. Ordinance 2280 and Map
2. Letter sent to property owner dated November 20, 2000
3. Annexation petition and application
C immon_p/annexatlons/AN 00-0018/Council Report—13301 Knaus Road
Council Report,AN 00-0018, 13301 Knaus Road 0 1 2
Page 10 of 10
6
ORDINANCE NO. 2280
AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING ONE PARCEL, COMPRISING APPROXIMATELY 2.5
ACRES AND LOCATED AT 13301 KNAUS ROAD TO THE CITY OF LAKE
OSWEGO; DECLARING CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ZONING PURSUANT TO LAKE
OSWEGO CODE 49.62.1600; DESIGNATING APPROPRIATE NEIGHBORHOOD
ASSOCIATION; AND WITHDRAWING THE AREA FROM THE CLACKAMAS
COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT AND THE LAKE GROVE
FIRE DISTRICT 1 2S1E04BD,Tax Lot 300)
WHEREAS, annexation to the City of Lake Oswego of the territory shown in the map in Exhibit
A and described below, would constitute a contiguous boundary change under ORS 222.111,
initiated by a motion of the City as outlined in ORS 222.111(2); and,
WHEREAS, the City has received consents to the proposed annexation from 100 percent of the
owners of land in the territory; there are no electors residing within the territory; and
WHEREAS, the part of the territory that lies within the Lake Grove Fire District,#57 would, by
operation of ORS 222.520, be withdrawn from that district immediately upon approval of the
annexation; and,
WHEREAS, the part of the territory that lies within the Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's
Patrol District would, by operation of ORS 222.520, be automatically withdrawn from the
district upon approval of the annexation; and.
WHEREAS, the part of the territory that lies within the Lake Grove Park District would remain
within the district upon approval of the annexation; and.
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Oswego Development Code, LOC Chapter 49.62.1600(1),
specifies that where the Comprehensive Plan Map requires a specific Zoning Map designation to
be placed on the territory annexed to the City, such a zoning designation shall automatically be
imposed on territory as of the effective date of the annexation; and,
WHEREAS, the Staff Report, which addresses applicable criteria, dated December 29, is hereby
incorporated; and
WHEREAS, this annexation is consistent with Chapter 14, Urbanization of the City of Lake
Oswego's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and Metro Code 3.09.050(b) and (d);
WHEREAS, the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Map designates an RC District Designation
on the parcel because of a prior determination that natural resources exist on the parcel that
should be protected under LOC Chapter 48.17 upon annexation, and that pursuant to LOC
Chapter 49.62.1600(2), the RC District Designation shall be placed on the territory annexed to
the City effective on the date of the annexation, provided however that the owner may request a
hearing on the designation pursuant to LOC Article 48.17 within 15 days from the date of
annexation; and
Ordinance No. 2280
Annexation of a Parcel at 13301 Knaus Road, 2S I EO4BD. Tax Lot 300
Page l of 4 013 EXHIBIT 1
AN 00-0018 F 3
•
•
The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section 1. The real property described as follows is hereby annexed to the City of Lake
Oswego:
A tract of land located in the northwest quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 East of
the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon; more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at an initial point that bears East. 204.63 feet from the southeast corner of Block 39,
plat of Forest Hills Acres (Plat#598) plat records of Clackamas County, Oregon; said initial
point being also South, 1202.58 feet and East,440.96 feet from the northwest corner of the
Josiah Franklin Donation Land Claim No. 43;
thence North 00° 22' 30" West, 230.61 feet to and along the east boundary of a tract conveyed to
Adolph W. Kuehn et ux by deed recorded May 26, 1957 in Book 531, Page 152, deed records of
Clackamas County;
thence South 89° 32' 10" East, 876.99 feet to a point in the west right of way line of Knaus Road
(40 foot wide);
thence South 00° 00' 30" East and tracing said west line of Knaus Road, 223.20 feet;
thence West, 875.49 feet to the point of beginning.
EXCEPT THEREFROM that portion conveyed to Conrad Custom Homes, Inc.
by deed recorded October 26, 1994 as Fee No. 94-084167, deed records of
Clackamas County.
Section 2. The annexed area lies wholly within the following districts and will be retained
within these districts upon the effective date of annexation:
Lake Grove Park District
Section 3. The annexed area lies within the following districts and will be withdrawn from
these districts upon the effective date of annexation:
Lake Grove Fire District, #57
Clackamas County Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District
Section 4. Zoning Designation. In accordance with LOC 49.62.1600, the City zoning
designation of R-7.5 on the westerly one-third of the parcel and R-10 on the easterly one-third of
the parcel will be applied immediately upon the effective date of annexation.
Ordinance No. 2280
Annexation of a Parcel at 13301 Knaus Road. 2S 1 F04BD. Tax Lot 300
Page 2 of 4 014
6 4
In accordance with LOC 49.62.1600(2), the City RC District Designation is imposed upon the
parcel(s), as mapped or delineated, subject however to the right of the owner(s) of the parcel(s)
to request a hearing within 15 days following the date of decision to annex the territory pursuant
to LOC Chapter 48.17.
Section 5. Neighborhood Association Designation. As provided in the Lake Oswego
Comprehensive Plan, Citizen Involvement Guidelines (August 1991), the City Council hereby
designates the subject property to be included within the boundaries of the Forest Highlands
Neighborhood Association, and said neighborhood association's boundaries are hereby amended
to include the subject property.
Section 6. Adoption of Findings and Conclusions. The City Council hereby adopts the
findings and conclusions set forth in the Staff Report referenced above in support of this
Annexation Ordinance.
Section 7. Effective Dates.
a. Effective Date of Decision to Annex. Pursuant to Metro Code 3.09.050(f., the
effective date of this annexation decision shall be immediately upon adoption, unless a
governmental entity that qualities as a "necessary party" under Metro Code 3.09.020(j) has
contested this annexation, in which event this annexation decision shall be effective on the 10th
day following the mailing of this ordinance by the City Recorder to Metro and to all necessary
parties who appeared in this proceeding.
b. Effective Date of Annexation Ordinance. Pursuant to Lake Oswego City Charter,
Section 34, this ordinance shall be effective on the 30th day after its enactment.
c. Effective Date of Annexation. Following the filing of the annexation records with
the Secretary of State as required by ORS 222.177, this annexation shall occur upon the later of
either:
1. the 30`h day following the date of adoption of this ordinance; or
2. the date of filing of the annexation records with the Secretary of State;
provided however that pursuant to ORS 222.040(2), if the effective date of the annexation as
established above is a date that is within 90 days of a biennial primary or general election or after
the deadline for filing notice of election before any other election held by any city, district or
other municipal corporation involved in the area to be annexed, then the effective date of the
annexation shall be delayed until, and the annexation shall become effective on, the day after the
election.
Section 8. Mailing Copies of this Ordinance; Metro Notice. Within 30 days following the date
of adoption,
(a) The City Recorder is hereby directed to mail a copy of this ordinance to all persons
and governmental entities that appeared at the public hearing and requested a copy
Ordinance No. 2280
Annexation of a Parcel at 13301 Knaus Road.2S 1 E04BD,Tax Lot 300
Page 3 of 4 01 CJ
1 65
yz,
•
of the ordinance following adoption.
(b) The City Recorder shall mail a copy of this ordinance together with the applicable
mapping and notice fee charged by Metro pursuant to Metro Code 3.09.110, to
Metro Data Resource Center, 600NE Grand Ave., Portland, OR 97232.
Read by title only and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego held on day of__. , 2001.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTALN:
EXCUSED:
4t.'ltlammt er,-Mrryur
Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
Dated:
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, Deputy City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i
c'eA.-jf 14!
David D. Powell
City Attorney
P'annexations/AN 00-0018/ordinance no.2280
Ordinance No. 2280
Annexation of a Parcel at 13301 Knaus Road. 2S 1 E04BD,Tax Lot 300
Page4of4 016 66
Annexation to the City of Lake Oswego
AN 00-0018/Ordinance 2280
,.....L_,.../ .." i
I T2SRIE
COUNTY i 13211
SECTION 4
• I LAKE OSWEGO rr
I
13305 1 13237 113211
/A City
1
- i ...1--_ _ VLimit
1 640 COl_j : -RY
COMMONS__,: ,
r _ I
cr‘
1
LA I
..,
'
• (---, 11' =--- 150' '\ Ni
,
a) _,
1:3
cil 1 .
'i:,"; 1°''';'-.1. ."''!••r,41141- 11 ,•'17-'-'''''''"-''. 11•'''1,r,1,‘!,.1A1.1,1.1.,
l
' ,,,„,
- ,orrl:': 13 311 ; 13322
ow imm
13301 '..'s 13337_ (,.
,...-
.4 Ul ---1 0
t
0 R a) 0 IA)
".--.1 U 1
UEOGRAPHIC
_ / LESLIE L A N E_ INFORMATION
1"--- _ ____ _
SYSTEM
I 13455 '=' 1 /17/01
,1-
c-_-] ....... ••••=111•••••011•••=1••••••ON=./.....
Area Annexed
LAKE OS
13520
COUNTY
1 ,
_ i 1 i 13595 ' 13585
_ 1
7... -- t!,!M!....
Lirl i1
dri
13615.............y. ____
.ct
. ....
...14,,_,-- - -- IMM i '7
,t 3501 13680
13699
Are: ,"nriwced_; --r-, -------------
..
,...- 4 13700
-.4-
-
------„, , 'j•- 1.--i f'-. .! 1.37 4':
— y ' •,,,
.------
r
EXHIBIT A
Ordinance 2280
LJ
1 C,J
-...4
. _
,...--
0 1 7 ; a) .4.
,-, 4
--- #1,1"
-4" zro7
•
November 20,2000
Peter and Christine A. Nickerson
13301 SW Knaus Road
Lake Oswego,OR 97034
Subject: Annexation of Property at 13301 Knaus Road (Tax Lot/Map 21E04BD00300)
Natural Resources Designation of Tree Grove(TG-11)
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Nickerson:
This letter is to inform you of City zoning designations, which will apply to your property upon
annexation, if approved.
The City's Comprehensive Plan Map designates your property as R-7.5,which permits residential
uses and requires a minimum of 7,500 square feet per lot. In addition, an important natural resource
has been identified and mapped on your property,and a Comprehensive Plan map resource
designation is also indicated. A tree grove extends onto your property and the overlay zone is
therefore RC(Resource Conservation). The City has a Sensitive Lands Ordinance, which provides
standards for natural resource protection. The attached map illustrates the general location of the
resources on your site.
The map does not represent the specific boundaries of the resources. The actual boundary would
need to be determined when new development on the site is proposed. The Sensitive Lands
Ordinance would then apply to the natural resource within the "delineated"boundary only. In
;essence, the ordinance requires that a minimum of 50%of the delineated tree grove be preserved and
that development be set back at least 5 feet from the protected area.
Please call if you would like additional information on what this designation means in terms of
natural resource protection standards. However, if you believe there is an error in the designation of
this resource, you have 15 days from the date of annexation to formally request a public hearing on
the resource designation. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at(503)635-0291.
Sincerely,
EXHIBIT 2
Ron Bunch Ali-U0-0018
Long Range Planning Manager
Attachment: Map of Natural Resource Sites
Cc: Douglas Dillavou. annexation applicant 019 Ivannexations/2(XNNAN(X)-0018 Nickerson/Knaus
69
_ t*I'I askf
CITY °FLA",a ObVVEGDEVELOPMENT
APPLICATION FOR
'_,,,....L-0.4/) \ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DER6R.TMENT
,,,r ., PLANNING DIVISION
1 380 A Avenue
72];;1/1
P.O. BOX 369 ANNEXATION
Lake Osweao• OR 97034
PHONE: (503)635-0290 _Al
ii
='LE NAME: SUBMIT: REVIEW:
—
RESUBMIT: _____ REVIEW:
_ _` NUMBER(S): - - APPLICATION MATERIAL RECEIVED:
CITY FEE RECEIVED: __ METRO FEE: S
RING DATE: CHECK#'S: "' RECEIPT#: _ _—_ —
I 7.,HECKLIST: Legal Description OTitle Report COMPLETENESS DATE.
❑Assessor's Map ❑Petition UFees (City and Metro)
PRINT OR TYPE ALL INFORMATION BELOW
APPLICANT @(USE MAILING ADDRESS FOR HEARING NOTIFICATION
Thu gas L. Dillavou 503-598-9454
.%-'AE PHONE# —� --
._DS NAME FAX# —
0. Box 1692
-,JCR SS SUITE --
Lt;ke Oswego Oregon 97035
:Jr!, STATE ZIP
EE-I.V. _ ,.ARE / ....
E GN.%-TeiRE ( RICk'INAL REQUIRED) DATE 1
TA: H ANNEXATION PETITION
PROPERTY OWNER la (ADDITIONAL OWNER-SEE PAGE 2)
Peter D. Nickerson and Christine A. Nickerson
YOUR,NAME PHONE#
ELSINESS NAME FAX#
. L5301 SW Knaus Road
ADORE SS SUITE
Lake Jswego __. Oregon 97034
--_
STATE ZIP
:`� _ •CRIGINAC REQUIRED) DATE l/�/�4J EXHIBIT 3
AN 00-00 I
0 ' 1
1
i,NNEXATION PETITION AND LEC AL DESCRIPTION FROM DEED
Y '2IT")DNAL PROPERTY OWNEF AORE THAN ONE OWNER
• = 'ac,ME PHONE#
NAME
FAX#
z�tC,RE S _ SUITE
STATE ZIP
I
_._,N.1.-'URE !ORIGINAL REQUIRED) DATE
--7:OFEPTOZONING DATA
:.301 SW Knaus Road
-:aus Road and Leslie Lane _— - --____
• _aescnptlon
crw-f`AX LOT (DO NOT USE SITE ZONING/PROPERTY INFORMATION
:na:per tine) LOT&BLOCK) ACRES EXISTING CODUTY CITY COMPREE 1 NSIVE PLAN CURRENT ASSESSED VALUE TOTAL EXISTING
ZONING DESIGNATION DESIGNATION POPULATION
_. 4A$� 2+/- Ac. R-20 R-10 & R 7.5 690,390
ACRES SO FT
L OF PARCEL AREAS: 2i Ac. 107,870 Approximately
Gi-TTS-OF-WAY
-0 BE INCLUDED A portion of Leslie Lane
EASON FOR
To provide city services to existing house and lot and future
r
dt:veivpme,IL Ui V,..CailL Laud.
� 1 1
�-- —
DES•: SE NUMBER AND TYPES OF STRUCTURES ON THE PARCEL(S)(USE TAX LOTS AS REFERENCE):
existing single family home at east end of site.
E ':_-" NG USE OFAREA TO BE ANNEXED
:a.dent ial --
=P:POSED USE OF AREA TO BE ANNEXED:
I:s idential
:ES$::RISE SURROUNDING LAND USES ;USE TAX LOTS AS REFERENCE)
w Residential
SCLTF —
Residential
—
Residential
Residential
4'99 022
T :; Jr4, 14Eisi k 4;s,p,6q 2
0
a
0
[ 4a:
_L a
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION TO THE N
N
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON N
ii To the Cay Council afire City o1 Lake Oswego:
i We, the undersigned owners antdiorek.oiors,petition and convect to be annexed to the City of Lake Oswego.
► ty
A map is attached.marked Exhibit A.showing the affected territory and its relationship to the present City boundaries. '
e? PWTLT ONSIGNIER& i 0
/An A• Property Dte ttoe i x
tii�nei�nc I Printed Niue (c eckbotbif Ow�cr'elElector'tMett 1 I + Date" i
tppYceble; Acidness ILa
PO RV I Tae Map I Tel Lot 3
t" 4 %� 1 / / Pi./V r - . ✓ i% Po Sok / , Iip. re_ ,t 11/8.10 0
7 'mak 1.3/ ) Q$ n
X ;�/, G.' 4 .). i 4,�.Y/ • : A G -— '- r). 1 v L-4 aswli60 0,C 7-7 ! � l l/g/0 0
_ — - - - ___ I
i-- __
Ia
0
•
w
., 1
—-- -- - _.__ _ co
Co
_._..r-_--_._.__ -_ _. I
m
4.
' ., PrY Owner. RV-Re -— --- - t al
0
Redacted Voter, i writ do 1 n r tom the date of�tii%
i
n a petition rich City
. -p
dam._.=\ya,
`�' 6 9. 1
01/16/01
AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: January 16, 2001
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 01-02. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego amending Administrative Procedure No. 5, "City Council Rules of
Procedure".
RECOMMENDED MOTIONS:
Move to adopt Resolution 01-02, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego amending Administrative Procedure No. 5, "City Council Rules of
Procedure".
EST. FISCAL ATTACHMENTS: NOTICED (Date):
IMPACT: N/A
• Council Report dated
01/01/01 from City
Attorney. Ordinance No.:
STAFF COST: $0 • Draft Council Rules of Resolution No.: Resolution 01-02.
BUDGETED: Procedure.
• Resolution 01-01 with Previous Council consideration:
Exhibit A.
.lanuary 9, 2001 study session.
FUNDING SOURCE:
i ) (a,
.Q=om_ 4y / `tz•1 JJ-
CITY ATTORNEY ASST. CITY MANAGER CITY M AGER
/- t - 01 ( I
Signoff/date Signoff/date Signoffl to
M.\Reso\Rpt•Cov00.do
75
LAKE ps wECp City Attorney's Office
Council Report
�GREGOT
f o: Judie Hammerstad, Mayor
Members of Lake Oswego City Council
Doug Schmitz, City Manager
From: David D. Powell,City Attorney
Date: January 11, 2001
Subject: Resolution 01-02 — Amendments to City Council Rules of Procedure
BACKGROUND
At the January 9, 2001 Study Session, the City Council directed that a resolution be prepared
amending the Council's Rules of Procedure. Resolution 01-02 will enact the amendments
presented to the Council on January 9`h, plus the additional changes directed by the Council that
evening.
DISCUSSION
The first attachment presents the Rules of Procedure with the additions shown in red type and the
deletions as s ril eugh. The second attachment is Resolution 01-02 which incorporates the
attached "official" version of the rule changes, with additions shown in shaded. hold. underline
igigtand deletions shown as striilkethrecugk-
1. Changes presented at the January 9. 2001 Study Session:
A new section 3(e) describes study sessions as typically including discussion with no final
action. However, the rule would retain the Council's ability to take action during the study
session if necessary or convenient.
Rule 4(b) would be amended to allow delivery of agendas and supporting materials to Councilors
by e-mail or fax.
Rule 4(c) would be amended to specify that the agenda could be altered either at the Mayor's
discretion, or by a majority vote of the Council. The clause "unless otherwise prohibited by
law" is unnecessary and would be deleted.
Rule 4(d)(vi) would be edited to allow the Mayor to alter the five-minute time limit I61 ritiien
comment.
Council Report
Council Rules of Procedure
January 11, 2001
Page 2
Rule 4(d)(x) would be amended to change the "Business from Councilors" agenda item to
"Information from Councilors." Matters could be brought up under this agenda item for
informational purposes, only. Matters requiring Council action would need to be specifically
placed on the agenda through one of the methods outlined in Rules 4(a) and 4(c).
Rule 5(b) would be edited to state the Mayor's Charter authority to preserve order and enforce
the rules.
Rule 5(c) would amended to add a new subsection (i) stating that the principles of Roberts Rules
of Order apply, but that strict adherence to those rules is not required. This is already spelled out
in the City Code.
Subsection (iii) of Rule 5(c) would also be altered to state that a motion should be made before
discussion of a question.
Subsection (iv) (formerly (iii)) of Rule 5(c) would be changed to provide that the Mayor would
call on each Councilor for discussion in the order of their requests to be recognized, rather than
in voting order. The provision allowing each Councilor the right to speak twice on each motion
would be deleted. (However the moving Councilor's privilege of final comment would be
retained.) Unless expanded by the presiding officer, each Councilor's comments would total no
more than five minutes.
The proposal updates Rule 6(a) to reflect the Charter amendment allowing both voice votes and
roll call votes.
Rule 6(d) would be changed to discourage abstaining votes. Any abstaining vote that
nevertheless occurs would be counted as a "non-affirmative" vote for the purpose of deciding
whether a motion has passed. (Under the current rule, an abstaining vote is counted with the
prevailing side.)
2. Additional Changes directed by the Council at the January 9. 2001 Study Session:
Rule 2(b) would be amended to prohibit meetings being held at places where discrimination on
the basis of age or sexual orientation is practiced. (The current rule already prohibits meetings
where discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, national origin or disability is
practiced.)
Rule 3(a) would be updated to reflect that regular meetings begin at 6:00 p.m.
Under Rule 4(d), Order of Business, the agenda item for Special Presentations would occur
immediately after the roll call, rather than after the Consent Agenda.
78
Council Report
Council Rules of Procedure
January 11, 2001
Page 3
Throughout the rules, "Mayor" is substituted for"presiding officer,"except where there is reason
to use the latter title.
In Rule 5(c)(iii)(D) "Business from Council" is deleted, since that agenda item has been changed
pursuant to the amendments presented on January 9th
.
3. Suzgested Additional Change:
Rule 5(c)(iii)(D) currently provides that a notice of intent to offer a motion to repeal could be
given under the "Business from Council" agenda item. (The rule implies, but does not state, that
a Councilor who voted with a prevailing side could have the notice placed on the agenda as a
matter of right.) Since the Council has directed that the `Business from Council" item be
changed to "Information from Councilors," it is necessary to clarify the process for giving such a
notice.
I would suggest that the rule be amended as shown in the attached draft. A Councilor who voted
with the prevailing side could have notice of his or her intent to move to repeal the action placed
on the agenda once as a matter of right. The notice could not be placed on the agenda again
except by the usual process (by the Mayor or a majority of the Council.)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council adopt Resolution 01-02, amending the Council's Rules of
Procedure.
Motion: "I move the adoption of Resolution 01-02, a resolution of the City Council of the
City of Lake Oswego amending Administrative Procedure No. 5, "City Council Rules of
Procedure."
7
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd - Page I)
Section: City Council
Subject,: City Council Rules of Procedure
Effective Date: Revised February 2. 1993 Procedure No.:
By Resolution 93-13
1. PURPOSE
These rules implement Lake Oswego Charter Chapter IV Section 14(A), which requires
adoption of rules to govern Council proceedings.
2. COMPLIANCE VITH OREGON PUBLIC MEETINGS LAW REOL.IRED
All meetings of the City Council shall comply with the Oregon State Public Meetings Law
(ORS 192.610 to 192.690), which is hereby incorporated by reference into these rules. All
provisions of the Public Meetings Law are applicable to meetings of the City Council even if
not expressly set forth in these rules. To the extent that any local procedure conflicts with the
Public Meetings Law, the latter shall prevail. [Charter Chapter IV Section 14(B).1
a. Meetings to be Open to the Public: All meetings of the Council shall be open to the
public and all persons shall be permitted to attend, except as otherwise provided by ORS
192.610 to 192.690. A "meeting" is the convening of a quorum of the Council in order to
make a decision or deliberate toward a decision on any matter. "Meeting" does not include
an on-site inspection of a program or project 'and does not include attendance at any
national, state or regional association to which the Council or its members belong.
(Charter Chapter IV Section 14(13).1
IL hootings to he Iltld aJ,ocutioo Oben to Public: Meetings shall not he held at any
place where discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, aye, sexual orientation,
81
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd - Page 2)
national origin or disability is practiced. Meetings shall not he held at any place
inaccessible to the disabled. Smoking in a public meeting is prohibited.
c. Minutes Required: Written minutes shall be taken for all Council meetings except
executive sessions which are audio taped. Minutes shall be available to the public within a
reasonable time after the meeting, and shall include at least the following:
i. Councilors present.
ii. All motions, proposals, resolutions, orders, ordinances and measures proposed and
their disposition.
iii. The results of all votes and the vote of each Councilor by name.
iv. The substance of any discussion on any matter
v. A reference to any public document discussed.
[Charter Chapter IV Section 16.E
d. Meetings to be Electronically Recorded: All meetings of the Council and Council
subcommittees shall be electronically recorded. [Charter Chapter IV Section 14(B).]
3. TYPES OF MEETINGS
a. Reuular Meetings: The Council shall hold a regular meeting at least twice per month.
The regular meeting shall be held on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 7 6:00
P.M. in the City Council Chambers, unless the Council cancels or reschedules the meeting.
If the regular meeting falls on a legal holiday, the meeting shall be convened at the same
time and place on the next regular business day. Notice of a regular meeting shall he given
by:
i. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City;
ii. Posting written notice in three public places;
iii. Providing the agenda and supporting material to members of the press who request
notice: and
iv. Providing the agenda to other persons who request copies.
[Charter Chapter IV Section 141A); WC 12.050.1
8;'
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Coned - Page 3)
b. Special Meeting: Special Meetings may be called by the Mayor or three or more
Councilors. At least 24 hours written or verbal notice must be provided to the Council and
to members of the news media and the public who have requested notice. [Charter
Chapter IV Section 14(A).]
c. Enwrgencv Meetings: In the case of an actual emergency, an emergency meeting may be
called by common consent of all available Councilors upon such notice as is appropriate to
the circumstances. The minutes of the emergency meeting shall describe the emergency
justifying less than 24 hours notice. [Charter Chapter IV Section 14(A).]
d. Executive Sessions: An executive session (a meeting closed to the public) may he held in
accordance with the Public Meetings Law. The Mayor may call any regular. special or
emergency meeting into executive session by citing the specific provision of ORS 192.660
which authorizes the session. Executive Sessions may also be separately scheduled
pursuant to the requirements for special meetings.
i. Attendance at Executive Sessions: The Mayor shall determine which persons other
than the Council shall attend an executive session.
ii. Media Attendance: Representatives of the news media shall be allowed to attend
executive sessions except those called pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(d) (deliberations
with persons designated to carry on labor negotiations). The Mayor shall instruct any
media representatives present not to disclose the substance of any discussion during
executive session.
iii. Final Decision Prohibited: No final decision shall he made in executive session. To
make a final decision. the presiding officer shall either call the meeting into open
session or place the decision on the agenda of a future open session.
c. Study Sessions: A special meeting". or an portion thereof. mai be designated as a
study session. Typically a studs. session designation indicates that matters of
substance sill be discussed, but hat final action IN ill not he taken, However, this
designation docs not prevent the ('timid! from taking tirmFtl action at the weetint_ if
necessary or coos mien!.
4. AGENDA
a. Scttine the Agenda: The Mayor shall determine the business to he placed on the Council
meeting agenda. Any Councilor may request that an item he placed on the Council
83
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd - Page 4)
Agenda. A majority of the Council may direct that an item he placed on the agenda.
[Charter Chapter V Section 19].
b. Delivery: Promptly after it is developed. • .. • .. • • : • - • .
pFintedrit the agenda shall be delivered to each Councilor together with any supporting
materials. Unless a Councilor requests otherwise, the agenda and materials may he
delivered electronically or h‘ telephonic facsimile.
c. Alteration of'the Agenda:
i. New matters: Matters not on the printed agenda may come before the Council as
determined by the Mayor or a majority of the Council.
prohibited ` w.
ii. Final Written Land Use Orders: Any Councilor voting with the prevailing side on a
tentative land use decision may continue consideration of the final written order to
the next regular meeting.
d. Order of Business: The Mayor shall establish the order of business for all meetings
except regular meetings. Regular meetings shall be conducted in the following order of
business, subject to the right of the Mayor, with Council consent, to alter the order of
business:
i. Call to Order.
ii. Roll Call.
iii. Special Presentations by the Council: This agenda item is reserved for the
presentation of awards or Special recognition to staff or citizens for special or
outstanding service.
Consent Agenda. The purpose of the consent agenda is to expedite the Council
meeting by grouping routine or uncontested items of business so that they may be
approved by one motion. The consent agenda may include any or all of the items on
the regular agenda. except as otherwise prohibited by law. The Mayor and City staff
shall develop the consent agenda during agenda setting. The Council by consensus
may add any item of business on the regular agenda to the consent agenda. Any
Councilor may remove any item from the proposed consent agenda for individual
consideration. A vote in favor or opposed to a consent agenda is considered to be an
affirmative or negative vote on each of the items on the consent agenda. Approval
of a consent agenda containing the reading of an ordinance shall he followed by a
reading of the ordinance title.
84
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd - Page 5)
ents4anding-f‘ei e-
v. Items Pulled from Consent Agenda.
This agenda item is reserved for consideration of items of business pulled from the
Consent Agenda pursuant to Rule 4(:1)(i++iv ), above.
vi. Citizen Comment: The purpose of citizen comment is to allow citizens to present
information or raise an issue regarding items not on the agenda. Unless altered by
the Mayor, a A time limit of five minutes per citizen shall apply. The Council may
accept the information, answer the question if simple. or refer the matter to the
appropriate City Department for review and response. If the matter is referred, the
Council may direct the Department to respond in writing to the citizen or to present
the response to the Council in the form of a Council report. in the latter case, the
citizen shall he notified of the date on which the report will come before the Council.
Citizen comment shall not exceed thirty (30) minutes unless the Council votes to
suspend the rules.
Public Hearings.
iii. Written Communications: This agenda item allows the Council to consider written
comments from citizens. Review shall be as provided for citizen comment.
ix. Reports of City Commissions or Committees: This agenda item allows members of
City Commissions or Committees to raise issues or present information to the
Council.
x. 8-usinetis Information from the Councilors: This agenda item provides an
opportunity for inch idual Councilors to Wing-any uro ide information Ilefoiv to
the Council un matters not otherli ise on the agenda. Each
Councilor will be given five minutes. This agenda item shall not he used For
matters reouiring action h‘ the ('uunc•iI. Action items must he placed on the
allenda pursuant to Rule 4(a) or 4(c), e. c •
w •
85
I
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Coned - Page 6)
xi. Departmental Reports.
xii. Orders.
xiii. Ordinances.
xiv. Resolutions.
xv. Reports of City Officers.
xvi. Approval of Minutes: Minutes may he approved without reading if the Council
members are given copies prior to the meeting.
xvii. Adjournment.
[Charter Chapter iV Section 17
5. CONDUCT OF THE MEETING
a. Quorum: A majority of the members of the Council constitute a quorum for conducting
business. [Charter Chapter IV Section 15(A).]
h. Presiding Officer: Hie Mayor shall preside at all meetings of the Council, The Mayor
shall preset-lc order and enforce the rules of the Council. In the absence of the Mayor,
the Council President shall preside. [Charter Chapter IV Sections 17 & 181
i. Absence of Pre;idi Ef+eer Mayor and Council President: In the absence of the
Mayor and the Council President, the Council shall elect a Councilor to serve as
presiding officer as its first order of business. Any Councilor may call a meeting to
order for the purpose of electing a presiding officer. [Charter Chapter iV Section
18.]
ii. Temporary Substitution of Presiding Officer: The presiding-o€ficer Mayor may
appoint a temporary presiding officer to cover his or her temporary absence from the
meeting by handing the gavel to the Council President or, if the Council President is
absent or serving as presiding officer, to any other Councilor.
c. Rules of Debate:
i. Rulc-.: I he principles set forth itt Rohm's Rules of Order, latest edition, should
be (Ibsen ed in the conduct of Council meetinis. Him er, strict adherence to
the requirements if those rules is inn required. \o action of the Council shall
86
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd- Page 7)
he in violation of this section for the reason that the action was not in
conformance with Robert's Rules of Order. ILOC 12.02.0101
ii. Participation: The Mayor or any Councilor may move a question, second a motion,
debate and vote. . . . ' - • • .
.Motions: A question is presented for decision by the Council by means of a motion.
A motion shall precede discussion of a question.
A list of available motions and the rules for passage are set forth in attached Exhibit "A".
A. Friendly Amendment: A formal motion to amend a main motion shall not be
necessary if the proposed amendment is accepted by the maker and the second of the
main motion.
H Withdrawing a Motion: A motion may he withdrawn prior to a vote by the maker of
the motion.
C. Reconsideration: A motion to reconsider any action by the Council may be made
during the same meeting at which the action was taken. A motion to reconsider
must he made by a Councilor that voted with the prevailing side, but may be
seconded by any member.
D. Repeal: Except as provided below, any action of the Council may be repealed. A
motion to repeal may be offered at any meeting following the meeting at which the
subject action was taken. The motion must be made by a Councilor who voted with
the prevailing side, but may be seconded by any member. A motion to repeal shall
be passed by a two-thirds vote of members present and eligible to vote, unless notice
has been given of the intent to offer the motion. If notice of intent is published on
the printed agenda . • ' . • • . • ," , a motion to repeal shall be
passed by a majority of members present and eligible to vote. Notice of intent shall
he placed on the agenda on one occasion upon the request of any Councilor
who voted with the prevailing •ide. Notice of intent shall not he placed on the
agenda on .ubsequent occasion. unless pursuant to Rule 4(a) or 4(e). The
following actions may not be repealed:
. An action that can be reached by a motion to reconsider.
2. An executed contract or agreement.
3. A final written land use decision, unless the ins tion is made within 21 days
of approval and specifies one or more reasons why the findings in favor of
the decision are incorrect.
87
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Coned - Page 8)
4. An action which either legally or by its nature cannot be undone.
Discussion: Following a motion T the mug-of€icer Mayor shall call on
Councilors for discussion according to,their requests for recognition. in-voting
• - . - - _• - . lac � i-ler
Cow:loth The moving Councilor shall have the privilege of final comment on the
motion. Councilors shall limit their discussion to five minutes each time a-tmember
speaks. This time limit may be expanded at the discretion of the Mayor. l
i‘. Preservation of Order: The presiding offfeer Mayor shall preserver order and
decorum, discourage personal attacks, and confine Council debate to the question
under discussion. The pt gamer ;Mai or may eject from the meeting any
person in attendance. including any Councilor. who becomes disorderly, abusive, or
disruptive, or who fails or refuses to obey a ruling of the presiding-of=f ter 1layor
regarding a matter of order or procedure. The peer Mayor may
summon the assistance of the Lake Oswego Police to assist in maintaining order.
[Charter Chapter IV Section 17; LOC 12.010.]
vi. Points of Order: Any Councilor may request a ruling from the presiding-weer
Mayor regarding procedure or preservation of order by calling for a point of order.
The presiding officer Mayor shall determine the point of order, subject to appeal by
any Councilor. An appeal shall he decided by majority vote. [LOC 12.(12.010.]
6. VOTING
a. Method of Voting: The vote on any question shall be taken
Voice or by roll call rote. -I'he Note shall be taken roll call at the direction of the
Mai or or at the request of an Councilor. The minutes shall reflect the c oto of each
Councilor name. [Charter Chapter IV Section 16.]
b. Order of Voting: At the first meeting of each year, the Mayor shall assign a scat on the
dais to each Councilor, except that the Mayor shall sit in the center seat and the Council
President shall sit directly to the Mayor's left. Roll call votes shall he called in order of
chair position. from the Mayor's right to the Mayor's left. The order of voting shall he
rotated each calendar week so the each Councilor has an equal opportunity to vote first and
last. No rotation shall occur in any week that no Council meeting is held. The voting
88
warommrma
Section: City Council Procedure No.; 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd - Page 9)
order of a meeting shall not change when the meeting is continued to a different week. g
[LOC 12.015.]
c. Vote Reouired to Decide a Question: Except as otherwise provided in these rules, the a
concurrence of a majority of the members present and eligible to vote is necessary to
decide a question. No question may be decided with fewer than three affirmative votes,
however, unless three or fewer members are eligible to vote on the question. in this event,
the question may only be approved by a unanimous vote of those eligible to vote at two
consecutive regular City Council meetings. The composition of the membership voting
need not be the same at both meetings. [Charter Chapter iV Section 15.]
d. Abstention: • • • • - . . • . • • •
s+d :Abstentions are discouraged. For the purposes of Rule 6(c) above, an abstention
shall not 1w considered an affirmative vote. Councilors who have a conflict of interest
or a disnualif•vinl bias should decline to participate rather than abstaining (Sec Rule
7, below).
7. CONFLICT OF INTERESTBIAS/EX-PARTE CONTACT
a. Conflict of Interest: Prior to participating in any decision, a Councilor shall declare any
potential conflict of interest. No Councilor shall participate in any manner regarding an
agenda item if doing so would create an actual conflict of interest.
r. "Potential Conflict of Interest" means any action by a councilor which would he to
the private pecuniary benefit or detriment of the Councilor or a member of the
Councilor's household, or a business with which the Councilor or member of the
Councilor's household is associated. "Potential conflict of interest" does not include
pecuniary affects arising out of:
A. Membership in a particular occupation or class required by law as a prerequisite to
holding the office of Councilor;or
B. An action which would affect to the same degree a class consisting of an industry,
occupation. or other group to which the Councilor or a member of the Councilor's olution 92-32;
household belongs.
b. Bias: No Councilor shall participate in any manner in a quasi-judicial decision if the
Councilor has actual bias regarding the decision.
8 9 91)
r4
CORR F CTI ON
' rims DOCUMENT
HAS BEEN REPHOTOGRAPHED
' 1'0 ASSURF
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd - Page 9)
order of a meeting shall not change when the meeting is continued to a different week.
[LOC 12.015.1
c. Vote Required to Decide a Question: Except as otherwise provided in these rules, the
concurrence of a majority of the members present and eligible to vote is necessary to
decide a question. No question may be decided with fewer than three affirmative votes,
however, unless three or fewer members are eligible to vote on the question. in this event,
the question may only be approved by a unanimous vote of those eligible to vote at two
consecutive regular City Council meetings. The composition of the membership voting
need not be the same at both meetings. [Charter Chapter iV Section 15.1
d. Abstention: . • . • . . . .
Abstentions are discouraged. For the purposes of Rule 6(c) above, an abstention
shall not he considered an affirmative vote. Councilors who have a conflict of interest
or a disqualifying bias should decline to participate rather than abstaining (See Rule
7, below).
7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST/BIAS/EX-PARTE CONTACT
a. Conflict of Interest: Prior to participating in any decision, a Councilor shall declare any
potential conflict of interest. No Councilor shall participate in any manner regarding an
agenda item if doing so would create an actual conflict of interest.
i. "Potential Conflict of Interest" means any action by a councilor which would be to
the private pecuniary benefit or detriment of the Councilor or a member of the
Cou icilor's household, or a business with which the Councilor or member of the
Cou cilor's household is associated. "Potential conflict of interest" does not include
pect.niary affects arising out of:
A. Membership in a particular occupation or class required by law as a prerequisite to
holding the office of Councilor: or
H. An action which would affect to the same degree a class consisting of an industry,
occupation. or other group to which the Councilor or a member of the Councilor's
household belongs.
b. : No Councilor shall participate in any manner in a quasi-judicial decision if the
Councilor has actual bias regarding the decision.
89
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Coned - Page 10)
i. "Quasi-judicial decision" means a decision involving the application of existing
criteria to identified persons or properties.
ii. "Actual Bias" means prejudice or prejudgment of facts to such a degree that a
Councilor is incapable of rendering an objective decision on the merits of the case.
c. Ex-Parte Contact: Before participating in any quasi-judicial decision, a councilor shall
declare any ex-parte contacts. An ex-parte contact is an oral or written communication
with a member of the Council regarding the merits of the case made outside of the public
hearing process during the pendency of a proceeding. (Communication with staff is not an
ex-parte contact). Effective declaration of an ex-parte contact shall include identification
of the party and disclosure of the nature of the communication.
8. COUNCIL, SUBCOMMITTEES
The Mayor, with Council consent, has the power to appoint Council subcommittees. A
subcommittee shall have whatever duties and shall serve for any duration the Mayor and the
Council deem appropriate. Such subcommittees may he standing or ad hoc committees. Each
Council subcommittee shall comply with the Council Rules of Procedure, subject to the
following exceptions and additions:
a. Presiding Officer: As its first order of business, each Council subcommittee shall elect a
chair to serve as presiding officer.
b. Mleetint;s: The subcommittee may adopt a regular meeting time, or the chair may call
special meetings, as the subcommittee deems appropriate.
c. Order of Business: The chair shall determine the agenda and the order of business to
come before the subcommittee, subject to the right of a majority of the subcommittee to
alter the agenda or order of business.
d. Approval of Minutes: The chair shall approve the minutes by signing and distributing
the minutes to the members of the subcommittee. Any member of the committee shall
have the right to request amendments to the minutes at the next regular subcommittee or
full Council meeting that occurs following distribution of the minutes.
CAJcipited October 15. 1991, Resolution R-91-50: Amended December 3. 1991, Resolution R-9I-59: Amended July 7. 1992. Resolution 92-32;
;\rrrcrsi d February 2. 1993.Resolution 93-13 1
90
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (C'ont'd - Page I I )
EXHIBIT "A"
LIST OF MOTIONS
MAY YOU MUST YOU IS THE
INTERRUPT BE MOTION VOTE
7M t DO THIS YOU SAY THIS SPEAKER? SECONDED? DEBATABLE? REQUIRED
L.i_-;ikiuu.r:business "I move that..." No Yes Yes Majority
motion)
a motion "I move to amend No Yes Yes Majority
this motion"
BZ , de the motion "1 move the No Yes Yes Majority
tr>Rci proms for question he
separate vote divided..."
*Si.uf.pend further "1 move we No Yes No Majority
coin ation of table this
iorned nng matter"
*Take up a matter "I move to No Yes No Majority
pery otasly tabled take from the
table..."
P:SK. xorne consideration "1 move we postpone No Yes Yes Majority
of ,cx'rketttung this matter until"
filar mething "I move we refer No Yes Yes Majority
ted funher this to..."
Ecu;debate "I move the No Yes No 2/3 vote
previous question"
',.daw um the meeting "I move that we No Yes No Majority
adjourn"
R.1.:;-a; the meeting "I move that No Yes No Majority
we recess until..."
•C,-+anp.arn about noise. "Point of privilege" Yes No No No vote
r eam temperature.etc.
•(*Ira 10 procedure or "Point of order" Yes No No No vote
91
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
SuI!ject: City Council Rules of Procedure (('ont'd - Page 12)
11 affront Chair decides
MAY YOU MUST YOU IS THE
INTERRUPT BE MOTION VOTE
TO DO THIS YOU SAY THIS E '? SECONDED'? DEBATABLE?DEBATABLE? REQUIRED
*R:+: ;�c ti information "Point of Information" SPYes AKERNo No No vote
x to considering" 1 object to Ycs
No No 2/3 vote
some matter consideration
of this'
'Rt .insider something "I move we reconsider Yes Yos Yes Majority
aim ) disposed of action on..."
*Coaditer something "1 move we suspend No Yos No Majority
not m scheduled the rules
order and..."
*VA::: on a ruling "I appeal the Yes Yes Yes Majority
by tiv presiding presiding officer's
of -:.s decision"
a = NOT AMENDABLE
sr`iK :.-•. -.02-I:xhA-C ouneiiitocedunes.doc
RESOLUTION 01-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
AMENDING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE NO. 5, "CITY COUNCIL RULES OF
PROCEDURE"
WHEREAS the City Council finds that its rules of procedure should be amended to improve the
efficiency of Council operations,
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that Administrative
Procedure No. 5 — City Council Rules of Procedure is hereby ,amended as shown on attached
Exhibit A. Added material is shown as ttoi } uii4 lWit#gt stsgsi. Deleted material is shown
by atfilEetlifetieh.
Considered and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on
the 16th day of January, 2001.
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Judie Hammerstad,Mayor
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie,Deputy City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO RM:
4.4°' ff'SC
David D. Powell
City Attorney
Page 1 of 1 - Resolution 01-02 93
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd -Page 1)
EXHIBIT
vesd0av► 83-13
Section: City Council
Subiect: City Council Rules of Procedure
Effective Date: Revised February 2, 1993 Procedure No.: 5
By Resolution 93-13
1. PURPOSE
These rules implement Lake Oswego Charter Chapter IV Section 14(A), which requires
adoption of rules to govern Council proceedings.
2. COMPLIANCE WITH OREGON PUBLIC MEETINGS LAW REOUIRED
All meetings of the City Council shall comply with the Oregon State Public Meetings Law
(ORS 192.610 to 192.690), which is hereby incorporated by reference into these rules. All
provisions of the Public Meetings Law are applicable to meetings of the City Council even if
not expressly set forth in these rules. To the extent that any local procedure conflicts with the
Public Meetings Law, the latter shall prevail. [Charter Chapter IV Section 14(B).]
a. jVIeetings to be Ouen to the Public: All meetings of the Council shall be open to the
public and all persons shall be permitted to attend, except as otherwise provided by ORS
192.610 to 192.690. A "meeting" is the convening of a quorum of the Council in order to
make a decision or deliberate toward a decision on any matter. "Meeting" does not
include an on-site inspection of a program or project and does not include attendance at
any national, state or regional association to which the Council or its members belong.
[Charter Chapter IV Section 14(B).]
b. Meetings to be Held at Location Open to Public: Meetings shall not be held at any
place where discrimination on the basis of race, creed, color, sex,age. sexual oricn�:rtiou.
91.)
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd - Page 2)
national origin or disability is practiced. Meetings shall not be held at any place
inaccessible to the disabled. Smoking in a public meeting is prohibited.
c. Minutes Required: Written minutes shall be taken for all Council meetings except
executive sessions which are audio taped. Minutes shall be available to the public within a
reasonable time after the meeting, and shall include at least the following:
i. Councilors present.
ii. All motions, proposals, resolutions, orders, ordinances and measures proposed and
their disposition.
iii. The results of all votes and the vote of each Councilor by name.
iv. The substance of any discussion on any matter
v. A reference to any public document discussed.
[Charter Chapter IV Section 16.]
d. Meetings to be Electronically Recorded: All meetings of the Council and Council
subcommittees shall be electronically recorded. [Charter Chapter IV Section 14(B).]
3. TYPES OF MEETINGS
a. Regular Meetings: The Council shall hold a regular meeting at least twice per month.
The regular meeting shall be held on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 6:00
P.M. in the City Council Chambers, unless the Council cancels or reschedules the
meeting. If the regular meeting falls on a legal holiday, the meeting shall be convened at
the same time and place on the next regular business day. Notice of a regular meeting
shall be given by:
i. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City;
ii. Posting written notice in three public places;
iii. Providing the agenda and supporting material to members of the press who request
notice; and
iv. Providing the agenda to other persons who request copies.
[Charter Chapter IV Section 14(A); LOC 12.050.]
96
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd- Page 3)
b. Special Meetings: Special Meetings may be called by the Mayor or three or more
Councilors. At least 24 hours written or verbal notice must be provided to the Council
and to members of the news media and the public who have requested notice. [Charter
Chapter IV Section 14(A).]
c. Emergency Meetings: In the case of an actual emergency, an emergency meeting may
be called by common consent of all available Councilors upon such notice as is
appropriate to the circumstances. The minutes of the emergency meeting shall describe
the emergency justifying less than 24 hours notice. [Charter Chapter IV Section 14(A).]
d. Executive Sessions: An executive session(a meeting closed to the public)may be held in
accordance with the Public Meetings Law. The Mayor may call any regular, special or
emergency meeting into executive session by citing the specific provision of ORS 192.660
which authorizes the session. Executive Sessions may also be separately scheduled
pursuant to the requirements for special meetings.
i. Attendance at Executive Sessions: The Mayor shall determine which persons other
than the Council shall attend an executive session.
ii. Media Attendance: Representatives of the news media shall be allowed to attend
executive sessions except those called pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(d) (deliberations
with persons designated to carry on labor negotiations). The Mayor shall instruct any
media representatives present not to disclose the substance of any discussion during
executive session.
iii. Final Decision Prohibited: No final decision shall be made in executive session. To
make a final decision, the presiding officer shall either call the meeting into open
session or place the decision on the agenda of a future open session.
e. Study Sessions: A special meeting. or any Portion thereof. may be designated as a
study session. Typically a study session desiotion indicates that matters of
substance will be discussed, but that final action will not he taken. However, this
designation does not prevent the Council from taking final action at the meeting jf
necessary or convenient.
4. AGENDA
a. Setting the Agenda: The Mayor shall determine the business to be placed on the Council
meeting agenda. Any Councilor may request that an item he placed on the Council
Agenda. A majority of the Council may direct that an item be placed on the agenda.
[Charter Chapter V Section 19].
97
I
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Coned- Page 4)
b. Delivery: Promptly after it is developed, As soon as the agenda is developed and
piifttedr it the agenda shall be delivered to each Councilor together with any supporting
materials. Unless a Councilor requests otherwise, the agenda and materials may be
delivered electronically or by telephonic facsimile.
c. Alteration of the a enda:
i. New matters: Matters not on the printed agenda may come before the Council as
determined by the Mayor 'or a majority of the Council. tmless—atheFwise
meted-by-low:
ii. Final *Written Land Use Orders: Any Councilor voting with the prevailing side on a
tentative land use decision may continue consideration of the final written order to
the next regular meeting.
d. Order of Business: The Mayor shall establish the order of business for all meetings
except regular meetings. Regular meetings shall be conducted in the following order of
business, subject to the right of the Mayor, with Council consent, to alter the order of
business:
i. Call to Order.
ii. Roll Call.
iii. Special Presentations by the Council: This agenda item is reserved for the
presentation of awards or special recognition to stall'or citizens for special or
outstanding service.
Consent Agenda. The purpose of the consent agenda is to expedite the Council
meeting by grouping routine or uncontested items of business so that they may be
approved by one motion. The consent agenda may include any or all of the items on
the regular agenda, except as otherwise prohibited by law. The Mayor and City
staff shall develop the consent agenda during agenda setting. The Council by
consensus may add any item of business on the regular agenda to the consent
agenda. Any Councilor may remove any item from the proposed consent agenda
for individual consideration. A vote in favor or opposed to a consent agenda is
considered to be an affirmative or negative vote on each of the items on the consent
agenda. Approval of a consent agenda containing the reading of an ordinance shall
be followed by a reading of the ordinance title.
outstanding
98
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Sybject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd -Page 5)
v. Items Pulled from Consent Agenda.
This agenda item is reserved for consideration of items of business pulled from the
Consent Agenda pursuant to Rule 4(d)( Lv), above.
vi. Citizen Comment: The purpose of citizen comment is to allow citizens to present
information or raise an issue regarding items not on the agenda. Unless altered b
the:Mavor,a A time limit of five minutes per citizen shall apply. The Council may
accept the information, answer the question if simple, or refer the matter to the
appropriate City Department for review and response. If the matter is referred, the
Council may direct the Department to respond in writing to the citizen or to present
the response to the Council in the form of a Council report. In the latter case, the
citizen shall be notified of the date on which the report will come before the
Council. Citizen comment shall not exceed thirty (30) minutes unless the Council
votes to suspend the rules.
vii. Public Hearings.
viii. Written Communications: This agenda item allows the Council to consider written
comments from citizens. Review shall be as provided for citizen comment.
ix. Reports of City Commissions or Committees: This agenda item allows members of
City Commissions or Committees to raise issues or present information to the
Council.
x. fess Information from the Councilors: This agenda item provides an
opportunity for individual Councilors to bring any provide information hefere to
the Council on matters not otherwise on the agenda. Each
Councilor will be given five minutes. This agenda item shall not he used for
matters requiring action by the Council. Action items must be placed on the
agenda pursuant to Rule 4(a) or 4(c), above. nates-faisin
xi. Departmental Reports.
xii. Orders.
xiii. Ordinances.
99
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd -Page 6)
xiv. Resolutions.
xv. Reports of City Officers.
xvi. Approval of Minutes: Minutes may be approved without reading if the Council
members are given copies prior to the meeting.
xvii. Adjournment.
[Charter Chapter IV Section 17.]
5. CONDUCT OF THE MEETING
a. Quorum: A majority of the members of the Council constitute a quorum for conducting
business. [Charter Chapter IV Section 15(A).]
h. Presiding Officer: The Mayor shall preside at all meetings of the Council. The'Mayor
shall preserve order and enforce the rules of the Council(In the absence of the Mayor,
the Council President shall preside. [Charter Chapter IV Sections 17 & 18.]
i. Absence of P..esidi g O`icer Mayor and Council President: In the absence of the
Mayor and the Council President, the Council shall elect a Councilor to serve as
presiding officer as its first order of business. Any Councilor may call a meeting to
order for the purpose of electing a presiding officer. [Charter Chapter IV Section
18.]
ii. Temporary Substitution of Presiding Officer: The press-ef€eer Mayor may
appoint a temporary presiding officer to cover his or her temporary absence from the
meeting by handing the gavel to the Council President or, if the Council President is
absent or serving as presiding officer,to any other Councilor.
c. Rules of Debate:
i. Rules: The principles set forth in Robert's Rules of Order, latest edition, should
be observed in the conduct of Council meetings. However. strict adherence to
the requirements of those rules is not required. No action of the Council shall
be in violation of this section for the reason that the action was not in
conformance with Robert's Rules of Order. 11,OC 12.02.0101
it. Participation: The Mayor or any Councilor may move a question, second a motion,
debate and vote.
.Motions: A question is presented for decision by the Council by means of a
motion. A motion shall precede discussion of a question.
100
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd- Page 7)
A list of available motions and the rules for passage are set forth in attached Exhibit "A".
A. Friendly Amendment: A formal motion to amend a main motion shall not be
necessary if the proposed amendment is accepted by the maker and the second of
the main motion.
B. Withdrawing a Motion: A motion may be withdrawn prior to a vote by the maker
of the motion.
C. Reconsideration: A motion to reconsider any action by the Council may be made
during the same meeting at which the action was taken. A motion to reconsider
must be made by a Councilor that voted with the prevailing side, but may be
seconded by any member.
D. Repeal: Except as provided below, any action of the Council may be repealed. A
motion to repeal may be offered at any meeting following the meeting at which the
subject action was taken. The motion must be made by a Councilor who voted with
the prevailing side, but may be seconded by any member. A motion to repeal shall
be passed by a two-thirds vote of members present and eligible to vote, unless
notice has been given of the intent to offer the motion. If notice of intent is
published on the printed agenda . :- ": - -•- ," , a motion to repeal
shall be passed by a majority of members present and eligible to vote. Notice of
intent shall be placed on the agenda on one occasion upon the request of any
Councilor who voted with the nrevaiiing side. Notice of intent shall not be
placed on the agenda on subsequent occasions unless pursuant to Rule 4(a) or
4(c). The following actions may not be repealed:
1. An action that can be reached by a motion to reconsider.
2. An executed contract or agreement.
3. A final written land use decision, unless the motion is made within 21 days
of approval and specifies one or more reasons why the findings in favor of
the decision are incorrect.
4. An action which either legally or by its nature cannot be undone.
Discussion: Follo‘iing a motion T the presidingreer Mayor shall call on
Councilors for discussion according to their requests for recognition, in voting
orflef• ...ir.zd -± 11 nct !'c interrupted
.. .. _ - .. - ._. _ _ Reeh Co unei lof
second—its ,.:til . . . . . . .. _ .. .. . ' - -.. • _ . •
101
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd-Page 8)
Council. The moving Councilor shall have the privilege of final comment on the
motion. Councilors shall limit their discussion to five minutes each time a member
speaks. This time limit may be expanded at the discretion of the Mayor. Ne
iv. Preservation of Order: The presiding officer Mayor shall preserver order and
decorum, discourage personal attacks, and confine Council debate to the question
under discussion. The presiding officer Mayor may eject from the meeting any
person in attendance, including any Councilor, who becomes disorderly, abusive, or
disruptive, or who fails or refuses to obey a ruling of the pfesidthg-efireer 'Mayor
regarding a matter of order or procedure. The presiding of icer Mayor may
summon the assistance of the Lake Oswego Police to assist in maintaining order.
[Charter Chapter IV Section 17; LOC 12.010.]
vi. Points of Order: Any Councilor may request a ruling from the presiding cfftccr
M " ,regarding procedure or preservation of order by calling for a point of order.
The presiding ffieer Mayor shall determine the point of order, subject to appeal by
any Councilor. An appeal shall be decided by majority vote. [LOC 12.02.010.]
6. VOTING
a. Method of Voting: The vote on any question shall be taken by
voice or by roll call vote. The vote shall be taken by roll call at the direction oi' the
Mayor or at the request of any Councilor. The minutes shall reflect the vote of each
Councilor by name. f Charter Chapter):V Section 16.)
b. Order of Voting: At the first meeting of each year, the Mayor shall assign a seat on the
dais to each Councilor, except that the Mayor shall sit in the center seat and the Council
President shall sit directly to the Mayor's left. Roll call votes shall be called in order of
chair position, from the Mayor's right to the Mayor's left. The order of voting shall be
rotated each calendar week so the each Councilor has an equal opportunity to vote first
and last. No rotation shall occur in any week that no Council meeting is held. The voting
order of a meeting shall not change when the meeting is continued to a different week.
[LOC 12.015.]
c. Vote Reuuired to Decide a Ouestioa: Except as otherwise provided in these rules, the
concurrence of a majority of the members present and eligible to vote is necessary to
decide a question. No question may be decided with fewer than three affirmative votes,
however,unless three or fewer members are eligible to vote on the question. In this event,
the question may only be approved by a unanimous vote of those eligible to vote at two
consecutive regular City Council meetings. The composition of the membership voting
need not be the same at both meetings. [Charter Chapter IV Section 15.]
102
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd- Page 9)
d. Abstention: . . - ... - . - . . ' b . . . ._ •.•, . . . --
shall be recordod as such. For the purpose of de:c--' �: - - . - - •�
�hded . - , - - , .. .. - -- _. • _ - .- •
Gide. Abstentions are discouraged. For the purposes of Rule 6(c) above, an'abstention
shall not be considered an affirmative vote. Councilors who have a conflict of interest
or a disqualifying bias should decline to participate rather than abstaining (See Rule
7, below).
7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST/BIAS/EX-PARTE CONTACT
a. Conflict of Interest: Prior to participating in any decision, a Councilor shall declare any
potential conflict of interest. No Councilor shall participate in any manner regarding an
agenda item if doing so would create an actual conflict of interest.
i. "Potential Conflict of Interest" means any action by a councilor which would be to
the private pecuniary benefit or detriment of the Councilor or a member of the
Councilor's household, or a business with which the Councilor or member of the
Councilor's household is associated. "Potential conflict of interest" does not include
pecuniary affects arising out of:
A. Membership in a particular occupation or class required by law as a prerequisite to
holding the office of Councilor; or
B. An action which would affect to the same degree a class consisting of an industry,
occupation, or other group to which the Councilor or a member of the Councilor's
household belongs.
b. Bias: No Councilor shall participate in any manner in a quasi-judicial decision if the
Councilor has actual bias regarding the decision.
i. "Ouasi-iudicial decision" means a decision involving the application of existing
criteria to identified persons or properties.
ii. "Actual Bias" means prejudice or prejudgment of facts to such a degree that a
Councilor is incapable of rendering an objective decision on the merits of the case.
c. Ex-Parte Contact: Before participating in any quasi-judicial decision, a councilor shall
declare any ex-parte contacts. An ex-parte contact is an oral or written communication
with a member of the Council regarding the merits of the case made outside of the public
hearing process during the pendency of a proceeding. (Communication with staff is not
an ex-parte contact). Effective declaration of an ex-parte contact shall include
identification of the party and disclosure of the nature of the communication.
103
•
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd-Page 10)
8. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEES
The Mayor, with Council consent, has the power to appoint Council subcommittees. A
subcommittee shall have whatever duties and shall serve for any duration the Mayor and the
Council deem appropriate. Such subcommittees may be standing or ad hoc committees. Each
Council subcommittee shall comply with the Council Rules of Procedure, subject to the
following exceptions and additions:
a. Presiding Officer: As its first order of business, each Council subcommittee shall elect a
chair to serve as presiding officer.
b. Meetings: The subcommittee may adopt a regular meeting time, or the chair may call
special meetings, as the subcommittee deems appropriate.
c. Order of Business: The chair shall determine the agenda and the order of business to
come before the subcommittee, subject to the right of a majority of the subcommittee to
alter the agenda or order of business.
d. Approval of Minutes: The chair shall approve the minutes by signing and distributing
the minutes to the members of the subcommittee. Any member of the committee shall
have the right to request amendments to the minutes at the next regular subcommittee or
full Council meeting that occurs following distribution of the minutes.
iopled October 15, 1991,Resolution R-91-50;Amended December 3, 1991,Resolution R-91-59;Amended July 7, 1992, Resolution 92-32;
. -raded February 2, 1993,Resolution 93-13.]
vg .Rts.o\01-02-ExtA-CouncilProcedures.doc
1 fl I
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd-Page 11)
EXHIBIT "A"
LIST OF MOTIONS
MAY YOU MUST YOU IS THE
INTERRUPT BE MOTION VOTE
TO DO THIS YOU SAY THIS SPEAKER? SECONDED? DEBATABLE? REQUIRED
Introduce business "I move that..." No Yes Yes Majority
(a main motion)
Amend a motion "I move to amend No Yes Yes Majority
this motion"
Divide the motion "I move the No Yes Yes Majority
into parts for question be
separate vote divided..."
*Suspend further "I move we No Yes No Majority
consideration of table this
something matter"
*Take up a matter "I move to No Yes No Majority
previously tabled take from the
table..."
Postpone consideration "I move we postpone No Yes Yes Majority
of something this matter until"
Have something "I move we refer No Yes Yes Majority
studied further this to..."
End debate "I move the No Yes No 2/3 vote
previous question"
*Adjourn the meeting "I move that we No Yes No Majority
adjourn"
Recess the meeting "I move that No Yes No Majority
we recess until..."
*Complain about noise. "Point of privilege" Yes No No No vote
MOM temperature, etc.
*Object to procedure or "Point of order" Yes No No No vote
to personal affront Chair decides
105
Section: City Council Procedure No.: 5
Subject: City Council Rules of Procedure (Cont'd -Page 12)
MAY YOU MUST YOU IS THE
INTERRUPT BE MOTION VOTE
TO DO THIS YOU SAY THIS SPEAKER? SECONDED? DEBATABLE? REQUIRED
* nest information "Point of Information" Yes No No No vote
-) :ct to considering" I object to Yes No No 2/3 vote
:r matter consideration
of this"
' onnsider something "I move we reconsider Yes Yes Yes Majority
3:ready disposed of action on..."
*C.r_nsider something "I move we suspend No Yes No Majority
:a r.in scheduled the rules
�r,: and..."
"7.-Die on a ruling "I appeal the Yes Yes Yes Majority
:7 7.. the presiding presiding officer's
r.er decision"
* =NOT AMENDABLE
«t. kesooi-02-ExhA-CouncilProcedures.doc
1n6