HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2010-10-05 PMLAS oswEco
AGENDA CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 380 AAvenue
PO Box 369
boa Tuesday, October 5, 2010 Lake Oswego, OR 97034
6:30 p.m. 503-675-3984
Council Chambers, 380 AAvenue www.ci.oswego.or.us
Contact: Robyn Christie, City Recorder Also published on the internet at:
Email: rchristie@ci.oswego.or.us www.ci.oswego.or.us
Phone: 503-675-3984
The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities. To request accommodations, please contact
the City Recorder's Office at 503-635-0236, 48 hours before the meeting.
Pape #
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PRESENTATIONS (20 minutes)
3.1 LOIS Update
3.2 Comprehensive Plan Update
3.3 LO Reads
3.4 Community Planning Month Proclamation
4. CONSENT AGENDA (5 minutes)
♦ 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.
4.1 REPORTS
4.1.1 Resignation from the Historic Resources Advisory Board
Action: Accept Resignation from Erin O'Rourke-Meadors
Jack Hoffman, Mayor ■ Roger Hennagin, Councilor ■ Dan Vizzini, Councilor
Donna Jordan, Councilor ■ Sally Moncrieff, Councilor ■ Mary Olson, Councilor ■ Bill Tierney, Councilor
Page 2
4.2 RESOLUTIONS
4.2.1 Resolution 10-60, approving an appointment to the citizen advisory committee for
the comprehensive plan update
Action: Adopt Resolution 10-60
4.3 MINUTES
4.3.1 June 8, 2010, special meeting
4.3.2 June 15, 2010, regular meeting
Action: Approve minutes as written
END CONSENT AGENDA
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
6. CITIZEN COMMENT (30 minutes)
The purpose of citizen comment is to allow citizens to present information or raise
an issue regarding items not on the agenda or regarding agenda items that do not
include a public hearing. A time limit of three minutes per citizen shall apply.
7. REPORTS (30 minutes)
7.1 Food Waste Collection, Tour Overview and Progress Report
7.2 WEB Proposal Timeline - report distributed separately
8. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL (15 minutes)
This agenda item provides an opportunity for individual Councilors to provide
information to the Council on matters not otherwise on the agenda. Each
Councilor will be given five minutes.
8.1 Councilor Information
8.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental
Committees
9. REPORTS OF OFFICERS (15 minutes)
9.1 City Manager
Page 3
9.1.1 Review of Council Schedule
9.1.2 Review of Council Digest
9.2 City Attorney
10. ADJOURNMENT
CABLE VIEWERS: This meeting will be shown live on Channel 28, at 6:30 p.m. The
meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28:
Wednesday 7:30 p.m. Friday 2:30 a.m.
Thursday 7:00 a.m. Saturday 12:00 p.m.
Watch Council meetings live wherever you are via live streaming video at
mms://www.ci.oswego.or.us/live
CITY COUNCIL / LORA TENTATIVE SCHEDULE
Items known as of 9/30/10
DATE
MEETING
Thursday,
Tour to the Wilsonville recycling facility, 2 p.m. -3:30 p.m.
October 7
Monday,
Special Meeting, 4-6:30 p.m., Oswego Room, WEB
October 11
• Water Partnership Update (program/project costs, partner allocations and
est. rate impacts) (1 hour)
• Policy on Media in Executive Sessions (1 hour)
• High Speed Rail (30 minutes)
Tuesday,
Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. WEB
October 12
• Comprehensive Plan Kick-off
Saturday,
Comp Plan Kick-off Event, 9 a.m. to noon, WEB
October 16
Tuesday,
No Council Meeting
October 19
Rail—Volution Conference (Oct 19-21, 2010)
Saturday,
Council Roundtable, 10 a.m.-noon, ACC
October 23
Tuesday,
Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
October 26
• Glen Lamb, Executive Director of Columbia Land Trust (5 minutes)
• Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Project DEIS Study Session (90 minutes)
• Comprehensive Plan Update — Draft Vision/ Futures Scenario Development
(with Planning Commission) (30 minutes)
• Neighborhood Enhancement Program proposal and update on neighborhood
planning (30 minutes)
• Plastic Bag Request
Tuesday,
Regular Meeting, 5:30-7:30 p.m. Council Chambers
November 2
• LOIS Update
Election Day
• Water Partnership Update
• Legislative Update
• Parks Maintenance video training
• Personal Services Contract to Provide Right -of -Way Acquisition Services Relating
to the Lake Oswego —Tigard Water Supply Partnership for Fiscal Year 2010-11
• Award Construction Contract Hatch Alarms at Water Reservoirs
• Food Waste Collection, Commercial Rate Adjustment
Public Hearing
• Request to annex 4747 Upper Drive (AN 10-0004/Ord. 2559)
Monday,
Joint meeting with the City of Tigard - tentative
November 8
BOLD ITEMS — New issues added to schedule
CITY COUNCIL / LORA TENTATIVE SCHEDULE
Items known as of 9/30/10
DATE
MEETING
Tuesday,
Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
November 9
• Context statement relating to Lake Oswego's Iron Industry and Mid -Century
periods (20 minutes)
• Emergency Operations Plan Update (45 minutes)
• Sensitive Lands Amendments to Definitions and Exempt Development
(LU 10-0043) (1 hour)
• Industrial Park Zone Amendment (LU 10-0042) (30 minutes)
• Revisions to list of invasive tree species (20 minutes)
• Comprehensive Plan text amendment to definition of congregate housing
(LU 10-0041) (20 minutes)
Tuesday,
Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
November 16
• Photo Contest Winners
• Neighbors Helping Neighbors
Study Session
• Comprehensive Plan Update — Goal 9 Economic Development and Goal 10
Housing (with Planning Commission) (60 minutes)
• Natural Area Restoration and Maintenance (30 minutes)
• Natural Resource Education and Outreach Proposals (30 minutes)
Tuesday,
Break for Thanksgiving
November 23
Monday,
Special Meeting, 5:00 p.m. Council Workroom
November 29
• Charter Officer Evaluations
Tuesday,
Special Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
November 30
• Update to Water Cost of Service Analysis
• Update to Master Fees and Charges
• Lake Grove Neighborhood Overlay (30 minutes)
• Review of small isolated tree groves on the Natural Resources Map
• Natural Resources Map Correction Process
Tuesday,
Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
December 7
• LOIS Update
• Water Partnership Update
• Comp Plan Update
• Unsung Hero Awards
• Award Professional Services Contract for Stormwater Code Rewrite
• Multiple site landscape contract
• Lake Oswego -Tigard Water Supply Partnership: Approval of Supply Facilities
Capital Improvement Plan
Public Hearing
• Sensitive Lands Amendments to Definitions and Exempt Development
(LU 10-0043)
• Comprehensive Plan text amendment to definition of congregate housing
(LU 10-0041)
• Adoption of revised list of invasive tree species
BOLD ITEMS — New issues added to schedule
CITY COUNCIL / LORA TENTATIVE SCHEDULE
Items known as of 9/30/10
DATE
MEETING
Tuesday,
Regular Meeting, 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
December 14
• ACC National Accreditation
• Sustainability Update
• Award Construction Contract for Chow Corner Pedestrian Improvements
• Kim Swan, Clackamas Water Providers Consortium
Public Hearing
• Lake Grove Neighborhood Plan Implementation —Amendments to create new
overlay zone (LU 10-0040)
• Industrial Park Zone Amendment (LU 10-0042)
• Update to Master Fees and Charges
Tuesday,
No Meeting
December 21
Tuesday,
No meeting
December 28
To Be Scheduled
• Municipal Finance
• Streetcar Locally Preferred Alternative Process (November)
• Lifelong Learning
• Adoption of Preferred Water Treatment Alternative (September)
• WEB Refinance Work Group recommendation
• Review draft Wastewater Master Plan (January 2011)
Regular Updates
• LOIS Update, 1st meeting every month
• Water Project Update, 1st meeting every month
• Streetcar Update, 2nd meeting every month
• Sustainability Update, quarterly (2nd meeting, June, Sept., Dec.)
• Financial Update, (Sept., Dec., March, June)
• Legislative Update, quarterly (1st meeting, June, Sept., Dec.)
• Comp Plan Updates
BOLD ITEMS — New issues added to schedule
31�4
LAKE OSWEGO
n. 119 -I.
a"'f LAKE
OSWEGO
O R E G O N
Proc&mation
October 2010 as Community Planning Month
WHEREAS, change is constant and affects all cities, towns, suburbs, counties, boroughs,
townships, rural areas, and other places; and
WHEREAS, community planning and plans can help manage this change in a way that provides
better choices for how people work and live; and
WHEREAS, community planning provides an opportunity for all residents to be meaningfully
involved in making choices that determine the future of their community; and
WHEREAS, the full benefits of planning requires public officials and citizens who understand,
support, and demand excellence in planning and plan implementation; and
WHEREAS, the month of October is designated as National Community Planning Month
throughout the United States of America and its territories, and
WHEREAS, the American Planning Association and its professional institute, the American
Institute of Certified Planners, endorse National Community Planning Month as an opportunity to
highlight the contributions sound planning and plan implementation make to the quality of our
settlements and environment; and
WHEREAS, the celebration of National Community Planning Month gives us the opportunity to
publicly recognize the participation and dedication of the members of planning commissions and
other citizen planners who have contributed their time and expertise to the improvement of the City
of Lake Oswego; and
WHEREAS, we recognize the many valuable contributions made by professional community and
regional planners of the City of Lake Oswego and extend our heartfelt thanks for the continued
commitment to public service by these professionals;
NOW, THEREFORE, the Lake Oswego City Council does hereby proclaim the month of October
2010 as Community Planning Month in the City of Lake Oswego in conjunction with the
celebration of National Community Planning Month.
Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
October 5, 2010
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Robyn Christie, City Recorder
City Manager's Office
SUBJECT: Resignation from the Historic Resources Advisory Board
DATE: July 12, 2010
ACTION
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
Accept the resignation of Erin O'Rourke-Meadors from the Historic Resources Advisory Board.
Reviewed by:
Alex D. McIntyre
City Manager
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Sidaro Sin, Senior Planner
�-2,�
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory Committee Appointment (PP 10-0007)
DATE: September 30, 2010
IT -ESI 1
Adopt Resolution 10-60 (Attachment 1).
DISCUSSION
On September 29, 2010, Erin O'Rourke-Meadors resigned from the Historic Resources Advisory Board
(Board) and the Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) (Attachment 2). Mrs. O'Rourke-
Meadors was also the Board representative on the CAC. In anticipation of Mrs. Meador's resignation, on
September 8, the Board recommended that Tim Mather represent them on the CAC.
Tim Mather has been on the Board since 2005. He owns a design -build firm in Lake Oswego and has been
a licensed contractor for 27 years. Tim served on the Sensitive Lands Second Look Task Force and was on
the Palisades Neighborhood Association Board for several years. Tim is currently working on the
restoration of the Belluschi Pavilion at the Marylhurst University campus.
ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adopting Resolution 10-60.
ATTACHMENT
1. Resolution 10-60
2. Erin O'Rourke-Meadors Letter of Resignation (9/29/10)
Page 2
Reviewed by:
Department Direc
Alex D. McIntyre
City Manager
RESOLUTION 10-60
A RESOLUTION OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF ERIN
O'ROURKE MEADORS FROM THE HISTORIC RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD AND THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITIZEN ADIVOSORY COMMITTEE, AND APPOINTING TIM MATHER TO
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CITIZEN ADIVOSORY COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2010 the City Council adopted Resolution 10-45 establishing a Citizen
Advisory Committee for the Comprehensive Plan Update and appointing some members to the
Committee; and
WHEREAS, on August 3, 2010 the City Council adopted Resolution 10-46 appointing the
remainder of the Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory Committee members; and
WHEREAS, also on September 8, 2010, in anticipation of Erin O'Rourke Meador's resignation
from the Historic Resources Advisory Board, the Historic Resources Advisory Board
recommended that Tim Mather (Board member) represent the Historic Resources Advisory
Board and historic preservation interests on the Citizen Advisory Committee; and
WHEREAS, on September 29, 2010, Erin O'Rourke Meadors resigned from the Historic
Resources Advisory Board and the Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory Committee.
IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL:
Section 1. The City Council accepts the resignation of Erin O'Rourke Meadors from the
Historic Resources Advisory Board and the Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory
Committee.
Section 2. Tim Mather is hereby appointed to the Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory
Committee.
Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council.
Approved and adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
held on 5th day of October 2010.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Page 1— Resolution 10-60 Attachment 1
ATTEST:
Robyn Christie, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FARM:
i
David D. Po ell
City Attorney
Page 2 — Resolution 10-60
Erin O'Rourke-Meadors
5261 Coventry Court Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035
22 Westpark Drive, Daly City, California 94015
29 September 2010
City of Lake Oswego
380 "A" Avenue
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
Dear Mayor and Members of Council,
It is indeed with regret that I formally submit my letter of resignation from both our
City's Historic Review Advisory Board, and the Comprehensive Plan CAC. My reality is
continuing responsibilities related to the care of my Mother necessitate more and more of
my time away in the Bay Area. My best wishes to all as they continue their good work on
behalf of our community.
Sincerely yours,
Erin
Attachment 2
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: Robyn Christie, City Recorder
City Manager's Office
SUBJECT: Approval of Meeting Minutes
DATE: September 28, 2010
ACTION
Approve minutes as written.
ATTACHMENTS
• June 8, 2010, special meeting
• June 15, 2010, regular meeting
Reviewed by:
Alex D. McIntyre
City Manager
y 3
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
Lkn0KAUX) CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES
June 8, 2010
Mayor Jack Hoffman called the special City Council meeting to order at 6:38 p.m. on June 8,
2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney,
and Jordan.
Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
City Recorder; Susan Millhauser, Sustainability Planner; Kevin McCaleb,
Water Conservation Coordinator; Kari Duncan, Water Treatment Plant
Manager; Joel Komarek, LO/Tigard Water Partnership Project Director; Jane
Heisler, LO/Tigard Water Partnership Communications Director; Denise
Frisbee, Director of Planning and Building Services
3. STUDY SESSION
3.1 Water Conservation Study Session with the Sustainability Advisory Board
Sustainability Advisory Board members present: Bruce Brown, Co -Chair; Grant Watkinson,
Co -Chair; and Gregory Monahan
Ms. Millhauser gave a PowerPoint presentation. She explained that she presented most of the
program background information to the Council during the Sustainability Plan progress report at
the June 1 Council meeting. She reviewed the 2012 target objectives for internal City water use
identified in the Water Management and Conservation Plan and the broad water conservation -
related goals found in the City Sustainability Plan. She noted the measurements used to track
progress in achieving the targets, which she reported on at the June 1 meeting.
She presented new information from the Water Conservation Management Plan, looking at water
usage data starting in January 2001. She noted the peaks in 2005 and 2006. She mentioned that
current water usage was a little higher than the peak use in 2001. She presented a pie chart
showing the percentages of water use by category, with single family residential having the biggest
slice (65%). She presented a graphic showing the annual indoor and outdoor use in Lake Oswego
in 2008 for single family residential.
She reviewed the City's progress towards meeting the 2012 targets. She mentioned plumbing
fixture retrofits and water conservation efforts, particularly in watering parks and street
beautification projects and the West End Building lawn. She spoke of the City's computerized
irrigation system that tied into the new weather stations, thus watering only when needed.
She presented data on the City's incentive programs to encourage water conservation in the home.
She observed that the City's program to encourage toilet retrofits has been successful and well
received by the citizens. She mentioned conducting internal and external water audits and
replacing water meters.
She indicated to Councilor Hennagin that replacing water meters enabled the City to track water
usage more accurately and bill customers properly.
She reviewed their public outreach efforts and ongoing customer service around water
conservation. She mentioned the ongoing program of leak detection and answering citizen
questions about water conservation at home and in the yard.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 16
June 8, 2010
She pointed out that all water usage in Lake Oswego had an energy component to it because the
water treatment plant used the most electricity of all City operations. She mentioned offsetting a
high level of emissions through purchasing renewable power.
Councilor Tierney confirmed Ms. Millhauser's explanation to Mayor Hoffman that, while there
was no way in the system to distinguish electricity produced by renewable power sources from
non-renewable power sources, a power company purchased or produced sufficient green energy
to meet its customers' demand.
Ms. Duncan confirmed to Councilor Hennagin that it was the electric pumps at the water
treatment plant and the intake facility that consumed so much power. She indicated that the City
installed one variable frequency drive at the intake facility as part of an Energy Trust upgrade, and
planned to install premium efficiency pumps with the new expansion. Ms. Millhauser mentioned
the lighting retrofits at the water treatment plant done also with the Energy Trust.
Ms. Millhauser presented a graphic showing the overall emissions from City operations. She
showed another graphic on renewable power, noting that more than 50% of the City's electricity
purchases were for the water treatment plant, and that half of the electricity at the water treatment
plant was renewable power.
She recalled the proposed water conservation actions she mentioned on June 1, including
automatic meter reads, ongoing water conservation training for City staff, exploring other potential
water sources, and expanding the weather station grid. She mentioned a pilot program using the
Around Energy Management software at six City facilities to provide real time data on electricity
use.
Ms. Duncan indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that the City could use Smart meters to monitor
leaks, to react to climate situations more quickly, to help maintain the integrity of the infrastructure,
and to cut down on car emissions by using telemetry as opposed to drive bys.
Councilor Moncrieff cited the information that 81 % of the community's water usage came from
single-family and multi -family residential combined, in asking if Smart meters were available to
residents. Mr. McCaleb indicated that Smart meters were available in a myriad of applications.
Staff was starting with a small enough program using only City facilities in order to determine how
well Smart meters would work in Lake Oswego, given its topography and existing software. He
confirmed that staff intended to take Smart meters citywide to the residents once they established
that the meters would work well in the City.
Councilor Moncrieff asked how staff could determine how much of the water usage was from
indoor or outdoor residential uses. Mr. McCaleb indicated that staff used wintertime usage as a
baseline and compared it to summer time usage.
Councilor Moncrieff questioned whether the public knew that their indoor use was almost double
their outdoor use, given that staff has only done 36 residential indoor audits. Mr. McCaleb
explained that staff combined the internal and external audits for efficiency reasons. Ms. Duncan
pointed out that the conservation program focused on the peak days during the summer because
those were the days that seriously stressed the water infrastructure.
Co -Chair Brown spoke to communicating the message that shaving down indoor water use would
translate to lower sewer bills because it was the indoor water use during the winter that dictated
the sewer charge. Councilor Moncrieff observed that, with outdoor irrigation use taxing the water
intake system and indoor water use taxing the sewer system, citizens paid for water usage on both
the front and the back end. Co -Chair Brown pointed out that the energy calculations for the city
did not include the energy spent by the Portland wastewater treatment plant.
Ms. Duncan indicated to Councilor Tierney that staff had data on the per capita water use
statistics for Lake Oswego, Tigard, and across the Metro area but not here to pass out. She said
that Lake Oswego used substantially more water per capita than neighboring communities. Mr.
McCaleb mentioned 175 gallons per person per day in Lake Oswego and 115 gallons in Tigard.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 16
June 8, 2010
He cautioned the Council that there was no standardization in how municipalities calculated their
per capita use, and therefore, the statistics could be misleading. He noted that Lake Oswego had
larger residential lots than Tigard but Tigard had more multi -family residential than Lake Oswego.
He agreed with Councilor Tierney that Lake Oswego was on the high-end of per capita use.
Councilor Tierney asked what the biggest cause was for Lake Oswego being on the high end,
and whether the City's plan addressed that factor. Mr. McCaleb said that Lake Oswego had
excessive summertime usage, which he attributed to the lifestyle as much as anything did. He
commented that public participation in water conservation efforts this year was the highest it has
ever been with conservation equipment flying off the shelves and more people attending his water
conservation classes. He concluded that the City was making good progress in communicating
with citizens and educating them on why they needed to manage their water better.
Councilor Tierney asked what was the percent per capita use of leakage in the system. Mr.
McCaleb indicated that he has tracked residential leaks for only the last year, and so far, the data
was showing leakage in one of four residential units. He explained that they usually found the
problem between the water meter and the house. He described to the Councilor how to read the
meter to determine whether there might be some leakage at a house.
Councilor Tierney asked if Ms. Duncan had a concern with leakage in the distribution system.
Ms. Duncan explained that the City had a good leak detection system, which found leaks
occasionally. However, currently they had 16% unaccounted for water produced but not billed,
which she did not think was primarily from leaks. She suspected meter inaccuracies and other
options.
Councilor Jordan referenced the Budget Committee recommendation to return the toilet
replacement fund allocation to the same level that it has been in the past. She wondered whether
staff should contact the Tier 2 and 3 summer water users directly regarding this program. Mr.
McCaleb commented that that was a viable option. He clarified that users usually only hit Tier 2
and 3 during the time of summer irrigation; the 16 unit mark of the rate system was reasonably
achievable by people, even with inefficient toilets.
Mr. McCaleb explained that the intent of the toilet rebate program was to get the inefficient toilets
in the many older homes in Lake Oswego off the system. He commented that, from his
perspective, it was as important to get Tier 1 users to replace their toilets, as it was to get a Tier 3
user to do so. He held that getting these inefficient fixtures off the system was key to the city's
overall savings and conservation.
Councilor Jordan asked with reclaimed water use and other types of reusable energy coming out
of the sewage treatment plant in Foothills would be part of Foothills study. Co -Chair Brown
commented, as a design professional, that the contractors would do so if the Council told them to.
He mentioned that the contractors might do it on their own anyway, but he thought that
encouragement by the Council would be good. He described this as an opportunity for the City to
have a major future development take that issue into account.
Mr. McIntyre indicated that the initial analysis might not take that question into consideration in
light of the bigger question about the wastewater treatment plant. He recalled staff advising him in
the past that the reclaimed water issue was relevant to Foothills. However, creating a redundant
pipe system for the reclaimed water raised questions around energy usage versus the cost savings
for the water. He said that they could undertake that analysis. Councilor Jordan clarified that she
had been wondering if there was a tradeoff between the cost of redoing the system and other gains
that might set off some of the initial expense.
Councilor Tierney asked the Sustainability Board members if there was anything that the City was
not doing that the Board thought it should be doing. Co -Chair Brown said yes. He recalled Board
discussions of the possibility of issuing a formal challenge to the Council to adopt an aggressive
policy to reduce City use of water in its facilities operations by 50% over a seven-year period. He
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 16
June 8, 2010
described the Board's attitude as generally wanting things on all sustainability fronts to move faster
and more aggressively, as opposed to small increments.
Mr. Monahan argued that they could not continue to price the finite resource of water as a free
good in light of the certain population increase coming. He spoke of aggressive conservation
efforts, including making water conservation an integral part of any new projects coming on line.
Councilor Tierney asked if staff looked at the impact of successful water conservation on the
City's revenues from its tiered water rates. Mr. Komarek recalled that staff did a water cost
service analysis a couple of years ago that assumed a 10% reduction in demand due to
conservation. They used this in forecasting the revenue impact and setting the rates accordingly.
He indicated that they would re -visit the data this year to make sure that the City's revenues were
still on track to fund the upcoming capital expenses and to assess how the conservation program
has affected the revenues.
Mayor Hoffman asked how reducing the community -wide peak season three-day demand by 1 % a
year for five years squared with the need to increase the water system with Tigard. He wondered
whether they could conserve their way out of increasing the system. Co -Chair Brown commented
that reducing the community's water use internally increased the City's water security. He spoke in
support of moving forward with the Lake Oswego -Tigard water project. He argued that having
water security and extra capacity built into the water system would be a good thing moving forward
into the future, given the uncertainties of adequate annual snow and/or rainfall and the certainty of
population increase. He described thinking that the water supply would remain consistent as
foolhardy in light of climate change.
Mr. Komarek concurred with Co -Chair Brown's comments. He remarked that the City could not
rely on conservation to buy time to avoid planning for a water treatment expansion in 10 years. He
indicated that conservation would buy future security and delay the next increment of supply.
Councilor Tierney mentioned another factor as the need to replace the City's aging infrastructure
and equipment.
Councilor Hennagin asked if it was practical to have systems that reused the gray water from an
individual residence for that residence's irrigation needs. Co -Chair Brown indicated that there
were products available now to do exactly that. The cost of installing such systems on new
construction would be negligible, while adding them onto existing residences would be more
expensive. He mentioned that the State now allowed the use of rainwater in residential toilets. He
suggested changing the definition of `water conservation' to include looking at alternate water
sources, such as reclaiming gray water, in order to reduce the amount of water taken out of the
river.
Councilor Tierney asked staff to provide a written report on the 16% lost in the system. Ms.
Duncan mentioned that staff requested funds in this coming fiscal year for a water loss audit in
order to track down that 16%. Mr. Komarek clarified that, while the Fire Department did have
unmetered water, that usage did not account for the 16%. He explained that the difference
between water production and water usage billed jumped suddenly from 9% before 2006 to 16%,
which was why staff did not think that the loss was in the system itself, given the amount of leak
detection and meter replacement the City did. He speculated that they would find it in the meter
reading and data extraction process. He mentioned that a monthly billing system (as opposed to
the City's current bi-monthly billing system) combined with automated meter reading systems
would help staff get a handle on the issue.
Councilor Olson commented that she was looking forward to that water audit, as she heard
frequently that Lake Oswego had a much higher per capita use than Tigard. She agreed with staff
that Lake Oswego had enough differences with Tigard in terms of Lake Oswego having larger lots
and more lawns and Tigard having more retail, commercial, industrial, and multi -family housing to
suggest that the difference was not as large as it was portrayed. Mr. McCaleb mentioned that
Lake Oswego staff would be meeting with Tigard staff to establish what each city included in its per
capita use calculations.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 16
June 8, 2010
Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Olson that Tigard was currently conducting a cost service
analysis, which might or might not lead them to a tiered water rate structure. He mentioned that
Tigard customers paid over $2 per unit for water compared to Lake Oswego's $1.15 per unit. He
commented that the higher Tigard rates sent a strong price signal that might explain some of the
differences in per capita consumption.
He mentioned his hope that they would start looking at the data on a gallons per account basis as
opposed to a per capita basis. He explained that the per capita use calculation included all water
uses divided by population and was not a good indicator or comparative tool. He commented that
looking at the account classes allowed better comparisons.
Councilor Hennagin observed that, with Tigard using a different system and computation
methodology, whatever data Lake Oswego received from them still might not tell staff anything.
Mr. Komarek concurred. He mentioned that staff would like to get back to below 10%, which was
the national organizations' suggested target.
3.2 Lake Oswego - Tigard Water Supply Partnership
Mr. Komarek introduced Bill Persich, Brown & Caldwell, Water Treatment Plant Expansion
Director.
• Background
Mr. Komarek gave a PowerPoint presentation on the history of the water system in Lake Oswego.
He began with the City's purchase of the water system from Oswego Light & Power Company in
1925, which consisted of a spring and one reservoir. He indicated that when the wells developed
by the City from 1925 to 1965 began degrading, the City selected the Clackamas River as its water
source option in 1965. He mentioned that the City built the backbone of the system for $4 million
between 1966 and 1969 with an expansion of the water treatment plant to 10 mgd capacity in 1980
to accommodate the community's growth.
He indicated to Councilor Olson that he thought that the reasons why the City chose the
Clackamas River as its water source had to do with the poor quality of the water in the Willamette
and Tualatin Rivers in the mid-1960s (this was before the Clean Water Act). He mentioned the
desire to have control of the water supply source, as opposed to purchasing water from Portland,
as another factor in the decision.
He indicated to Mayor Hoffman that staff was discussing injecting water back into the old wells in
its conversations about potential supply augmentation strategies.
He mentioned that the original system pieces of the water treatment plant, the intake pump station,
and the first reservoir were still operating. He described the watershed with Timothy Lake as its
head (Clackamas River Basin Map). He noted today's system of 250 miles of pipe, several
reservoirs, and 13,500 connections (500 in 1925). He presented a graphic of Lake Oswego's
current service area.
He confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that Lake Oswego did not directly serve all its residents. He
reviewed the statistical breakdown of Lake Oswego's 40,000 plus customers served either directly
by the City or by special service districts contracting with Lake Oswego for water.
He presented the staff's underlying assumptions in planning for water demand and population
growth. He explained that the difference between the unincorporated and the in -city figures
represented Lake Oswego's actual growth in comparison to Metro's overall growth rate projections.
He presented the factors that staff considered in developing a water supply plan and the horizon in
planning for major infrastructure. He discussed the environmental elements also considered in
water supply planning.
He moved to the engineering side of water supply. He explained that, even if the City could
conserve its way out of expanding its water system, the condition of the infrastructure raised the
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 16
June 8, 2010
question of whether it would last another 50 to 100 years. He noted other issues of public safety
and reliability.
He reviewed the issues discussed by past Councils about water supply planning, including whether
to include Stafford. He indicated that, since 1995, the City has been considering serving the entire
urban services boundary with City water, including potentially limited portions of Stafford. He
spoke of keeping the regional growth forecasts in the context of the City's own sub -regional needs.
He commented that any new infrastructure built needed to last a long time and have the capacity to
serve growth in the future. He argued that taking a proactive approach to infrastructure planning
provided the City with an opportunity to influence how and when growth occurred, and to be ready
to deal with it in advance rather than reacting to it.
He referenced the 2007 Carollo report on the combined planning effort by Lake Oswego and
Tigard to look at supply options and partnership supply scenarios. He mentioned the report's
finding that a supply capacity that would ultimately use Lake Oswego's entire rights from the
Clackamas was the most favorable option in terms of costs and efficiencies. He indicated that, as
part of the project definition phase, staff was looking at over -sizing facilities in keeping with a 50 to
100 year horizon and the expected growth demand, as well as to avoid having to rebuild expensive
infrastructure elements. He noted that there were some components more easily upsized, which
the City could add incrementally over time as needed.
Councilor Johnson asked if it was more expensive to hedge their bets by over -sizing components
today than to build less expensive smaller components and wait to see what the future brought.
Mr. Komarek indicated that staff was considering that question. He used the raw water pipeline as
an example of how a pipeline to carry 32 mgd was essentially the same size as one to carry 38
mgd. He commented that the cost of adding a few more square feet of structure to a new intake
facility to accommodate an additional future pump was marginal in comparison to remodeling costs
20 years down the road. Mr. Persich pointed out that treatment modules at the treatment plant
came in distinct incremental sizes of 1 mgd or 5 mgd; the City would have to expand by those
amounts.
Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Jordan that some of the water districts purchased water from
Lake Oswego, such as the Lake Grove Water District. He described an unusual example of the
Lake Grove Water District piping Lake Oswego water to a Lake Oswego subdivision over by the
Waluga Reservoir because the reservoir was not tall enough to serve that subdivision.
He indicated to Mayor Hoffman that the Glenmorrie Water Cooperative had its own supply and
distribution system for serving water to many city residents, which it was responsible to maintain.
In case of a failure of the Glenmorrie system, Lake Oswego would open the emergency inter -tie
with that system to get water to those residents.
He explained to Councilor Jordan that, on a practical level, these special water districts could not
serve Stafford because they did not have the capacity or infrastructure in place to handle the
demand. He mentioned that legally special water districts were limited to their defined service area
boundaries, and could not serve outside that boundary, unless by special agreement with the City.
Mr. Powell noted that most special districts would dissolve once the City's boundaries
encompassed the entire district, some by intergovernmental agreements and some by state
statute.
Mr. Komarek confirmed to Councilor Jordan that if the Glenmorrie wells failed, and the
Cooperative chose not to repair the wells, then it would dissolve and become part of the Lake
Oswego system. Councilor Jordan wondered whether those purchasing property in Glenmorrie
were aware that they would not get City water. Mr. Komarek indicated that staff did receive
inquiries about getting on City water, but directed those citizens to their board because the City
could not go into Glenmorrie's service area.
Councilor Hennagin asked if the City could install more powerful pumps to push the water
through a smaller pipe faster as a way to increase capacity, instead of installing a larger pipe. Mr.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 16
June 8, 2010
Komarek explained that doing so had higher energy costs for the pumping and created stresses
on the pipes. He mentioned that right now the City was shoving 16 mgd of water through the 10
mgd water pipeline from the treatment plant to the Waluga Reservoir.
• Water Treatment
Mr. Persich gave a PowerPoint presentation on why water treatment was necessary. He reviewed
the two primary drivers of protecting public health according to federal and state regulations and
achieving the aesthetic parameters of taste, odor, color, and appearance. He presented the eight
step Business Case Evaluation (BCE) process (p.9), using the process in progress now at Lake
Oswego as an illustration of how those steps broke down into three modules. He indicated that, at
the end of the first workshop, the expert panel identified 16 different water treatment alternatives.
By the end of the second workshop, the team screened those sixteen alternatives down to six,
after determining rough cost estimates and going through an evaluation process. He noted that
the upcoming third and final workshop would end with a recommended treatment alternative and a
refined cost estimate.
Councilor Tierney pointed out that the City Councils of Lake Oswego and Tigard would make the
decision on this highly technical recommendation. He encouraged the Council members to attend
the Thursday workshop.
Mr. Persich reviewed the water quality parameters for the water treatment process. He explained
that the intent of the turbidity standards was to remove the particulate matter that microorganisms
used as cover. He indicated that the City treated the water for the seasonal taste and odor
problems based on customer complaints. He mentioned the microorganisms (bacteria and
protozoa), noting giardia, and cryptosporidium in particular. He discussed the organics family
(molecules containing carbon and hydrogen), which included naturally decaying organics
(vegetation in the water) and man-made organics (herbicides and pesticides, pharmaceuticals,
etc.). He spoke of a subset of organics, disinfection byproducts (DBPs), which were the chemicals
resulting from organic molecules reacting with the chlorine disinfectant. He noted that the State
and EPA regulated DBPs.
He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that microorganisms included macro -invertebrates, but the
latter were big enough to remove easily. He observed that if they got the small organisms, they
would also get the big ones.
He reviewed the water quality highlights of Lake Oswego present system. He stated that the City
had high quality raw and finished water that met all the existing treatment regulations. He
described the lower Clackamas River as an "extremely excellent water supply source." He said
that the raw water data showed no cryptosporidium in the system. He referenced a 2005 USGS
study on pesticides and herbicides in the lower Clackamas River, which found the concentrations
of herbicides and pesticides in the raw and finished water so low that the team was not worrying
about them right now. He indicated that they did have technologies available to take care of it, if it
should become a problem.
He indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that the team considered the possibility of changing
conditions and microorganisms, such as cryptosporidium, appearing where none had been before.
He said that there were alternatives available to deal with cryptosporidium.
He discussed the disinfection byproducts (DBPs). He indicated that the current concentrations of
DBPs in Lake Oswego water were below the regulatory limit; the water met all the health
requirements and regulations for DBPs. He explained that one of the panel experts, who sat on an
EPA regulating board, advised the team that the DBP regulations might become stricter in the
future.
Councilor Hennagin asked if using a different disinfectant than chlorine would avoid the DBPs.
Mr. Persich explained that all disinfectants were oxidizing chemicals and formed their own sets of
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 16
June 8, 2010
DBPs. Since chlorine was the most predominantly used disinfection agent, there was more
evidence to suggest a concern.
He presented a graph summarizing the DBP data for the two different species: haloacetic acids
and total trihalomethanes. He pointed out that Lake Oswego's finished water tested at half the
regulatory standard for the acids and one-quarter of the standard for the methanes in 2009. He
explained that the current regulations allowed averaging of data to determine the levels. However,
the EPA was looking at returning to individual spiked samples as a threshold for violation or
concern. He observed that it would likely take five to ten years before the federal government
changed the regulations, if it decided to do so.
He noted the spiked sample for both species found in the distribution system recently. He
indicated to Councilor Tierney that there were many factors that could cause a spike but organics
in the water reacting with the chlorine was the starting point.
He reported that, while the water treatment plant functioned well and met all the City's water quality
needs, the team did not think that it would meet these potential new regulations. He cited the
occasional problems with taste and odor and the age of the facility (40+ years old). He discussed
the alternatives examined by the team. He presented a chart illustrating how the cost went up as
the level of water quality performance increased. He described the direct filtration process as a
base level of treatment designed to remove particulates and microorganisms. He discussed the
conventional filtration process, enhanced treatment modes (ozonization, biological active filtration)
and exotic treatment processes (granular activated carbon, UV light, hydrogen peroxide). He
presented a chart listing each level of treatment and what it did (p.10).
He reported the expert panel's assessment through the two workshop sessions that the
conventional filtration process could meet the potential new DBP regulations. Therefore, the team
concluded that the direct filtration process was not a viable candidate for any expansion, a finding
consistent with the 2007 study. He mentioned another conclusion that the City did not need the
exotic treatment processes because its water did not have the level of organics that those
treatments were designed to remove.
He mentioned his expectation that the team would conclude at the next workshop that the
conventional filtration process was the most likely alternative to meet the City's current needs and
the future DBP concern. He commented that the team would like consider the ozone/active
filtration process as an optional add-on. He mentioned the $15 to $20 million in additional capital
costs to use the ozone process, which translated to $300,000 more a year in operating costs and
$4 to $6 more a month for customers.
He indicated that the upcoming workshop would not only validate the net present worth
computations and monetize the risks and benefits of the options, but the team would look at
sustainability and neighborhood impacts also. He mentioned doing a sensitivity analysis on their
assumptions, resulting in a recommendation from the expert panel.
Mr. Persich explained to Councilor Olson that the three categories of organics were taste and
odor, DBPs, and Other. Other included all other types of organics, whether they were manmade
(pesticides, herbicides, pharmaceuticals) or naturally occurring. He reiterated that, while the ozone
treatment would do a more complete job of removing trace organics, the conventional filtration
system was adequate to remove the organics down to the required standards today. He
mentioned that the concentrations of pharmaceuticals in raw water reported in the literature were
low. He considered it unlikely that EPA would regulate them. He confirmed to the Councilor that
the City could physically add-on the ozone treatment to the plant in increments later.
Councilor Hennagin asked if the plan was to build a new water treatment facility or to
remodel/reconstruct the existing building. He suggested leaving room for add-on treatment
modules. Mr. Persich indicated that the core option was to build upon the existing tankage, add to
it, and leave room for the ozone add-ons. He mentioned the option of building new tankage if they
determined that the existing tankage was not likely to last another 40 years.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 16
June 8, 2010
Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Olson that the estimated life of the existing plant was 40 to
50 years. He commented that their objective was to build facilities with a minimum life span of 50
years, preferably a 50 to 75 year life span.
Councilor Tierney mentioned that the Clackamas River as an excellent source of water was a
baseline piece of information, and a place to start. He commented that every expert on the panel
praised the operation of Lake Oswego's water treatment plant. He indicated that those two factors
were pluses that made things less expensive and decisions easier. Mr. Persich remarked that
Lake Oswego was not violating any current regulations because of the way the plant was operated.
• Communications/Outreach
Ms. Heisler gave a PowerPoint presentation. She discussed the goals that staff set for public
involvement for this treatment decision process: informing the public about the process leading up
to the recommendation, hearing public concerns and aspirations, and providing feedback to the
public on how the City would use their input. She mentioned their information tools of the
LOTigardWater.org website, press releases, utility bill inserts, open houses, and articles in both
Cities' newsletters. She indicated that they were doing an entire Water Savvy series discussing
the technical issues related to the partnership and simplifying them. She thanked Mr. Persich and
his team for their help in rendering technical issues understandable to the layperson.
She reported that the consultation and feedback methods that they have used (citizen survey and
focus groups) showed that people thought that Lake Oswego's water was tasty and they gave the
City accolades for providing good and safe water (93% were satisfied with their water quality).
However, most people did not know where their water came from, which indicated a need for more
education.
She encouraged the Council members to attend the June 24 open house, even though it conflicted
with an important Festival of the Arts event. She indicated that the Citizen Sounding Board
(comprised of eight citizens, four from each city) has been working hard in discussing the technical
issues raised at the workshops and their possible impacts.
She reviewed the coming events, beginning with the Oversight Committee's meeting next Monday
to discuss the treatment process. She mentioned a joint City Council meeting on July 12 and a
study session in September/October on the supply facilities plan. She indicated that each Council
would adopt the supply facilities plan in December.
She indicated to Mayor Hoffman that staff was doing the outreach because they thought that the
community would be concerned about the partnership providing this essential service. She agreed
that it was a big and expensive decision.
Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 8:30 p.m. He reconvened the meeting.
3.3 West End Property Debt Refinancing Options
Mr. McIntyre noted that he was here in response to a Council directive to bring back a more
permanent financing strategy for the West End Building (WEB) line of credit. He reviewed the
background of the WEB purchase (p.11-12). He mentioned the purchase in 2006 of the 89,000
square foot building for $20 million for the purpose of creating a multi -generational community
center on the site. He noted that today approximately 50 City employees worked out of the
building, using approximately 20,000 square feet.
He discussed the three year tax-exempt variable line of credit (interest only) used to purchase the
building (p.12). He noted that the interest payments have fallen from $1.1 million in 2006 to
$365,000 in 2010, due to the poor economy. He commented that it was not a good financial plan
to depend on the low interest payments to continue.
He discussed the refinancing options identified by staff (pp. 13-15). He noted that the City's
investment in this 30 -year old building has been nominal because of the original purchase intent to
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 16
June 8, 2010
renovate or rebuild the building. He indicated that the building systems were reaching the end of
their 30 -year life spans, the chillers in particular (p.12). He explained that, without at least one
chiller operational to cool the facility, the building was not inhabitable because of the lack of
operable windows. He mentioned staff's struggle with the question of whether to invest a quarter
million dollars in a chiller for a building that might or might not be torn down. He advised the
Council to refinance the debt with extra funds to improve the facility to a better working condition.
He said that his $25 million figure was a round number solely for conversation purposes.
He referenced the chart on p.12 listing the interest payments paid as of last November, totaling
$2.5 million.
He emphasized that the question that needed answering in regards to the refinancing options was
what did the Council want to do with the building. He stated that staff struggled with investing in
the property or refinancing it, since they had no clear, specific direction from Council.
He reviewed the first option of selling the building (p.13), noting that they could not sell it for what
they paid for it. He pointed out that it would likely take several years to sell, and, once it sold, they
would have to relocate the staff to another site. He commented that the big issue with selling for
less than they paid for it was where they got the money to make up the difference. He recalled
Council's direction not to use general fund operating or reserve funds, yet that was the only
unrestricted money that the City could access. He questioned what impact using the reserve funds
to pay this debt would have on the City's bond rating, which was directly related to its healthy
reserves.
He reviewed the second option of leasing the building (pp. 13-14). He pointed out that the
commercial real estate market was very different from the residential real estate market. He
observed that many office uses would not mix well with the kids attending the Parks & Rec
programs held at the WEB. He mentioned the conversations that he and Mr. Williams have had
with commercial brokers over the past 18 months. He commented that, even if they could lease
the building, they still had to refinance the building.
He reiterated that the third option of continually renewing the line of credit was not a viable long-
term solution (p.14). He discussed the fourth option of a full faith and credit bond (p.14). He
recalled Chip Pierce's explanation last October that a full faith and credit bond rested on the full
faith and credit of the City's general fund, and could help the City start to pay down the principal.
He pointed out that this option of the general fund paying for the debt contradicted the Council's
direction not to use the general fund. He noted that the market was still good for this kind of bond.
He indicated that the Council reserved the sole authority to issue full faith & credit bonds, and did
not need to go to the voters. He observed that politically it might not be prudent to do so without
some form of public participation. He referenced the chart (p.14) showing possible rates, terms,
and annual principle and interest payments.
He discussed the fifth option of issuing general obligation bonds (p.15). He noted that this was the
only alternative available that responded to the Council strategy to move the burden of the WEB
financing away from the general fund. He recalled the voters turning down GO bonds to finance
WEB purchase two years ago. He mentioned that anecdotally he heard that the reason for the
rejection was that the City did not tell the citizens what it intended to do with the building. He
commented that it would be foolish to go out for another GO bond without answering that question.
He remarked that he thought the City needed to intensify the use of the site in order for the $20
million investment to make sense. He recalled the golf/tennis facility study's finding that the City
could locate a new tennis center on the WEB property, but he did not think that a $21 million tennis
center made sense; they needed to put shared uses on the site. He mentioned the Council
direction in its Facilities strategy to address City Hall and to site a police/9-1-1/court public safety
facility. He discussed the concept of a civic campus on the WEB property that incorporated several
civic uses and returned publicly owned property to private ownership.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 16
June 8, 2010
He spoke of a GO bond strategy that asked the voters to support a civic campus concept. He
commented that he saw a tolerance question on how much voters were willing to pay to put
several uses at the WEB site. He indicated that the formula staff developed on the homeowner's
cost for a GO bond (p.15) was based upon Chip Pierce's initial analysis of the costs to build
something at this site.
He observed that there might be more strategies for Council's consideration besides these he
presented. He pointed out that the Council did not have any good choices in this situation. He
described the situation as the City had a responsibility to manage this asset properly, and it fell to
this Council to answer the question of what was the best thing to do for this community. He
suggested, should the Council decide to pursue a GO bond strategy, that the Council form a
subcommittee to explore what uses might go on this site that the public might accept and put the
bond forward for a vote sometime in the future.
COUNCIL QUESTIONS
Councilor Jordan confirmed that what the Council heard anecdotally two years ago was that
people wanted to know what would happen at the WEB before paying for it with their taxes. She
agreed that the Council needed to explore what kinds of facilities the City could locate on the WEB
property that answered the Facilities strategy needs. She pointed out that they also needed to
have answers for how they would address the higher priority needs if they ended up putting lower
priority needs at the WEB property.
She argued that the only option for the Council was to look at maximizing this investment now and
to find out whether the public would support a phased approach or an all at once approach. She
observed that the more uses they put at the WEB property, the greater impact it would have on
that end of town. She emphasized having a clear and comprehensive strategy laid out in advance
before asking the voters for the money to do it.
Councilor Hennagin asked if the City could reduce the principal on a bond by a lump sum
payment, should proceeds come in from the sale of civic properties, such as the current City Hall or
Adult Community Center sites. Mr. McIntyre explained that the Council could either borrow the
money all up front or do an analysis upfront to figure out what the tradeoffs would be and reduce
the amount borrowed. Ms. Euler indicated that typically, bonds were not structured to allow early
payments, but there were options that the Council could consider. Mr. McIntyre confirmed to
Councilor Olson that a shorter -term bond, such as a 10 -year callable, would have higher interest
rates.
Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Hennagin that staff could provide a list of the bonds that
would be stepping down or the City would be paying off in the next several years, such as the
street bond. Councilor Tierney noted that the budget book listed the bonds.
Ms. Euler indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that staff would explore how to use the sale of those
public properties to offset or shorten the citizens' payments on the WEB. Mr. McIntyre mentioned
that the next series of conversations with the Council would discuss how the Council wanted to
structure the bonds, including the possibility of pre -authorizing up to a certain amount, and phasing
it in over $10 million increments based on what the City was building at the WEB site.
Councilor Moncrieff suggested holding the money from the property sales, if the City could not
pay off the bond in lump sums, and using it to the benefit of the taxpayers. Councilor Jordan
suggested putting that money in a capital maintenance fund for facilities, since the City currently
did not have a way to maintain its facilities.
Councilor Tierney concurred with Mr. McIntyre that these were not good choices, yet the Council
needed to answer the question of what to do with the WEB. He suggested using this time of low
interest rates to find an answer that made economic sense. He commented that most Council
members have expressed a reluctance to move City Hall to the WEB and fill the WEB with
municipal uses, yet, at this point, he did not see any other alternatives.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 16
June 8, 2010
He appreciated Mr. McIntyre's comment that, whatever avenue the Council chose, it needed to
take that choice to the voters. He spoke in support of a Council subcommittee to identify the
issues, to decide on a public engagement approach, and to figure out what to do. He observed
that the Council would probably not like any of the results, but they needed to move something
forward.
Councilor Moncrieff concurred with Councilor Tierney's comments. She referenced Guiding
Principle No. 4 in the June 2, 2009, Facilities strategy document that spoke of developing a
concept plan for the future redevelopment of the WEB property and of refinancing the WEB. She
expressed her sense of urgency in finding a permanent stable funding source, as she did not like
the insecurity of a flexible interest rate.
Councilor Olson agreed that whatever road the Council pursued, it had to go out for a vote. She
asked Mr. McIntyre to review the funding formula. Mr. McIntyre explained that Mr. Pierce used the
current assessed value of the City at $5.5 billion, a 4% interest rate, and a 20-year bond term to
end up with $10 per $100,000 of assessed value per $10 million borrowed. He pointed out that
those numbers would change over time as the formula values changed. He confirmed that the
current assessed value of the City did not include the potential $1 billion value of a redeveloped
Foothills District.
Councilor Olson stated for the record that she opposed full faith and credit bonds unless
approved by a vote of the people. She indicated that she did not support encumbering the general
fund with such bonds, and, therefore, preferred the GO bonds. Councilor Jordan commented that
full faith and credit bonds would always be the last resort, and that GO bonds were their
preference.
Councilor Olson asked if staff had a more current figure than last November's for the annualized
interest rate show on p. 12. Mr. McIntyre explained that that had been the latest information staff
had a month ago when he pulled it a month ago. Ms. Euler mentioned that the interest payment
the City made in the meantime was roughly half the $154,000 shown. She indicated to Councilor
Olson that the most recent interest rate charged was 1.68%. The next interest rate would come
out in a couple of months.
Councilor Jordan expressed her hope that the Council had a consensus on moving forward with
a committee to study the alternatives for developing the West End property with the idea of going
to the voters for approval in 2011 (the fifth option).
Councilor Moncrieff commented that she thought the Council has studied the issue thoroughly
and had all the pieces in place. She mentioned the prior studies on facilities needs, the falling
prices, and the known public attitude within the past year. She spoke to moving forward by putting
together the information and the studies and seeing how to get the best possible value for their
citizens.
Councilor Johnson agreed. She pointed out that a vote allowed only a `yes or no' question,
which was why they needed to state exactly what the option would be in order to get an answer on
which the Council could base subsequent decisions. She commented that, while it would be
difficult to figure out what the right proposal would be and the right question that would provide the
Council with the information that it needed, she had faith that they would develop something to
take to the voters. She argued that the action that the Council needed to take was to make a
decision. She supported forming the committee.
Councilor Olson commented that she did not want to lose sight of the need to do something
about the high priority of the Maintenance facility and its status as part of public safety during these
discussions. She recalled the feedback that the Council received from the focus groups during the
Facilities study that the citizens wanted to keep City Hall in the downtown. She mentioned the
information received during that study that civic uses were not the highest and best use of
properties in the Kruse Way corridor. She spoke in support of informing the voters of exactly what
the Council would do with the proceeds from a GO bond, and what actions it would take. She
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 16
June 8, 2010
remarked that last time some citizens voted against a GO bond because the City did not say what
it would do with the property, while others voted no, thinking that the City would sell the building.
Councilor Hennagin stated for the record that the City walking away from this debt (similar to
people walking away from their homes and letting the bank take them) was not an option. He
observed that the bank would still come after the City for the difference between the amount owed
and the amount for which the property sold. Therefore, letting the bank take the property back was
not a practical option for the City. Mr. McIntyre concurred.
The Council indicated by a nodding of heads its consensus to direct the Mayor to form a
subcommittee, as proposed by Mr. McIntyre, to look at the public development of the WEB
property and GO bonds, and to report back to the Council no later than September 2010.
3.4 Sensitive Lands Decision Making Process
Mayor Hoffman reviewed the upcoming Council listening sessions on June 29, June 30, and July
10. He informed the Council of his discussions with staff about telling people that they could e-mail
their questions in as they watched the televised Council meetings on June 22 and June 23 (the
Second Look Task Force Report). This would provide Council with immediate feedback and
possibly allow staff to answer some of those questions at the meeting.
He indicated to Councilor Olson that he did not anticipate the June 29 and 30 meetings to involve
give and take between the Council and the public; the intent was to let people express their
concerns and questions.
Councilor Moncrieff suggested allowing people to send their questions in from now to June 29 in
order to give the City time to respond to them. She asked staff to put a button on the City website
linking directly to the Second Look Task Force report.
Mayor Hoffman mentioned that Councilor Olson has contacted Lake Oswego Stewards and asked
them to forward his e-mail (with the link to the report) to its e-mail list. He commented that he was
thinking of sending out another e-mail asking for feedback on the Task Force recommendations.
Councilor Hennagin suggested classifying the e-mail questions by topic, as many were likely to
ask the same question, and answer it only once. Mayor Hoffman concurred.
Councilor Hennagin commented that many residents mistakenly believed that the Council would
make its final decision on the recommendation. He asked Ms. Frisbee to review for the TV
audience what the process was, once the Council received the recommendation.
Ms. Frisbee mentioned July 20 as the tentative date for Council deliberations on the
recommendations, at which time the Council would adopt a resolution. This resolution would
identify the recommendations that the Council wanted to adopt and direct the Planning Department
to develop the code amendments necessary for those recommendations related to code
amendments. She observed that many of the recommendations did not require code amendments
but they did have significant budget implications. She explained that staff would take the code
amendments to the Planning Commission for public hearings and then to the Council for more
public hearings.
She indicated that next week staff intended to provide the Council with a matrix to guide the
members through the recommendations. This matrix would identify which code amendment
recommendations the Council could adopt in a relatively short time that would allow staff to make
changes immediately to provide the flexibility addressed by the recommendations. She mentioned
the medium timeframe recommendations considering budget impacts and identifying outreach
strategies, and the longer -range recommendations suggesting a different way to look at resource
protection or a broader scope of resource protection.
Councilor Moncrieff commented that citizens had until July 20 to communicate their questions
and concerns to the Council. She asked what public education strategies staff had planned, as
she heard that people did not understand the recommendations. Ms. Frisbee observed that this
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 16
June 8, 2010
was a complicated and difficult issue, which made it challenging to present it in a manageable and
bite -size fashion. She mentioned a flyer that staff would mail to every household in the city, which
summarized the recommendations and identified the deliberations process. In addition, staff would
send a special notice to all property owners with sensitive lands -designated properties. She spoke
of press releases, community calendars, Hello LO, and articles in the local newspapers.
Councilor Olson commented that she was happy to hear that staff was getting this information out
to the people in advance of the study sessions.
Councilor Tierney thanked the Mayor for the new schedule. He commented that he did not think
that people would bring questions to the Council but rather they would bring their opinions to the
Council. He expressed his concern that the Council have sufficient time for its deliberations on
these 62 recommendations and come up with a good solution. He argued that the ultimate goal
was to make a decision that protected the resources and had community support. He questioned
whether one evening was sufficient time to find the right answer.
Mayor Hoffman acknowledged the point. He agreed that the Council has already talked about
some of the recommendations, such as a watershed Council, and that others that sounded good
would have budget implications and need further exploration. He anticipated revisiting some of the
budget implications prior to Mr. McIntyre putting together his budget in the fall.
Councilor Jordan remarked that a date of July 20 gave the Council a target for moving the priority
issues forward. She commented that Ms. Frisbee's timeframe of short, medium, and long term
should help the Council figure out what it needed to resolve on July 20 and what could wait.
Councilor Tierney clarified that he wanted to know where the Council members were on the over-
riding issues (such as how to protect resources), as opposed to specific recommendations. He
referenced a question he received in an e-mail asking how it was that this issue was so divisive in
a community where everyone shared the same values of protecting natural resources. He
reiterated the need to look at the total picture. Mayor Hoffman argued that the recommendations
were not based on the key message but rather on the context of the regulatory sideboards.
Councilor Moncrieff concurred with Councilor Tierney that they all had the goal of protecting their
natural resources while respecting private property. She referenced the past citizen vision
statements that stated that all new development would be compatible with the environment, which
raised the question of how to implement that statement. She suggested that the flyer going out to
all citizens include the website addresses where citizens could look at the mapping and follow the
history of the process. Ms. Frisbee indicated to Councilor Moncrieff that the separate mailer
would go to every property owner with a sensitive lands designation, either current or proposed.
Councilor Olson thanked the Mayor for adjusting the schedule. She indicated that, while she
agreed with Councilor Tierney that the July 20 date was a goal date for reaching some decisions, it
should not be a hard and fast date if they were still struggling with the bigger questions of what to
protect and how to protect it. She concurred that they needed to take the time to answer those
questions correctly.
Mayor Hoffman discussed the logistical issues of holding the listening sessions at City Hall. He
pointed out that the building only held 170 people, which limited the number of people who could
actually attend. He agreed with Councilor Tierney that the Council could only listen to about 40
people between the two three-hour listening sessions; if they had a question and answer session,
then that reduced the number to 20 per meeting. He encouraged citizens to get their questions
and concerns in now. That way, they would know that their elected officials were hearing their
concerns but they would not have to speak publicly if they did not want to.
Ms. Frisbee mentioned staff's exploration of having a panel on June 29 to represent the various
viewpoints and speak before beginning public comment as a way to move through the concerns in
a more concerted way. She pointed out that the problem was the desire to televise the meetings,
which they could not do at the WEB. She said that the Public Affairs Manager was looking into
video testimony, in addition to the public testimony, which the City could post on the website.
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 16
June 8, 2010
Councilor Johnson observed that people wanted to make sure that their issues were being heard
and that they were being counted. She suggested that people submit their testimony and state the
number of people they had who agreed with them, which would help the City count the citizens
who did not speak during public comment. Councilor Olson suggested that the newspaper
articles and mailers include an invitation to submit e-mail comments or otherwise communicate
their questions and concerns to the Council for the next month and include the number of people
represented by the question/concern.
Ms. Frisbee indicated to Councilor Hennagin that staff had explored broadcasting an earlier
meeting from the high school auditorium, and found that it would not work.
Councilor Jordan commented that she would find it very helpful if people would discuss in their e-
mails the specific recommendations) of concern. Ms. Frisbee indicated that staff could pinpoint
that information when offering opportunity for comment on the website. She concurred with
Councilor Tierney that people often had a general angst about the program and not about a
specific recommendation.
She mentioned that the staff report next week would inform the Council on which
recommendations staff would like to see implemented, as the recommendations were to the
Planning Department. She reviewed the range of topics covered by the recommendations, both
non -regulatory and regulatory. She noted that the recommendation to change the definition of
development would bring the City in line with Metro's model code definition of development and go
a long way to addressing the primary concerns expressed by citizens regarding what uses the
ordinance did and did not allow in the buffer zones. She observed that this was not a set of
regulations that would make everyone happy, but they needed to meet the Metro requirements and
address the larger objectives set by the Task Force.
She reported that she informed the LONAC Chair, in response to the letter he submitted today
detailing their concerns about the timeline, that she would make sure the Council heard their
concerns. She said that if any Council member did not get that e-mail, staff could provide it to
them.
Mayor Hoffman mentioned the six regulatory sideboards as part of the context of the discussion.
He asked whether staff has addressed the issue of whether the whole program was constitutional.
Mr. Powell recalled that staff did address the issue in the comments, but they could talk about it
again. He indicated that the Metro attorneys also addressed it at the Second Look Task Force.
• 50 Plus Advisory Board
Councilor Jordan asked to reduce the nine -member board to a seven -member board, similar to
all other boards, except the Sustainability Advisory Board. She explained that the Board had three
open positions and two resignations coming up. She suggested recruiting and interviewing for the
three open positions only in anticipation of changing the committee per ordinance required by the
City Charter.
She indicated to Councilor Olson that the Sustainability Advisory Board had eleven members plus
two youth members because the range and scope of sustainability required expertise in a number
of different areas. She explained to the Councilor that the 50 Plus Advisory Board started with
nine members as a way to keep the existing Adult Community Board but expand its scope and add
new members.
4. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Councilor Jordan recused herself from the Executive Session due to an actual conflict of interest;
the subject matter involved a client of her husband's law firm.
Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting to Executive Session at 10:02 p.m. pursuant to ORS
192.660 (2) (h) to consult with legal counsel concerning the rights and duties of the City with regard
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 16
June 8, 2010
to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. Mr. Powell reviewed the Executive Session
parameters.
5. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
Mayor Hoffman reconvened the meeting at 10:05 p.m.
6. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robyn Christie
City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON October 5, 2010
Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 16
June 8, 2010
LA,�� �,60 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
.,.,, r,,,Y . MINUTES
June 15, 2010
Mayor Jack Hoffman called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. on June
15, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney,
and Jordan.
Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
City Recorder; Ursula Euler, Finance Director; Kim Gilmer, Parks and
Recreation Director; Jordan Wheeler, Management Analyst; Brant Williams,
Economic and Capital Development Director; Ann Adrian, Adult Community
Center Director; David Donaldson, Asst City Manager
3. PRESENTATIONS
3.1 Lake Oswego Meal Network Advisory Board Donation
Ms. Adrian introduced Andy Harris and Gail Keck, co-chairs of the Lake Oswego Meals Network
Advisory Board, and Ruth Berberich, Adult Community Center, winner of the Outstanding
Employee of the Year Award.
Mr. Harris presented a $30,000 check photo to the Mayor to help fund the Lake Oswego Meals on
Wheels program. He explained that their Board did fundraising to help pay for the program's
deficit. He thanked New Seasons Market and the Lake Oswego Review for partnering with the
Board last year on their Harvest Fundraiser, through which the Board raised over $7.000. He
thanked the civic and religious organizations that have generously contributed to the program.
He mentioned that the Meals on Wheels program has served the Lake Oswego community over
the last 40 years, but with the current economy, 40% of the homebound meal recipients could not
contribute towards their meals. He invited the community to join the Board this October at its
Harvest fundraiser at the New Seasons Market, Mountain Park store.
Mayor Hoffman accepted the check on behalf of the City, the Council, the employees, and the
Adult Community Center. He thanked Mr. Harris and led the audience in a round of applause
congratulating the Board on its work.
Bob Kincaid Internship
Mr. Donaldson introduced Kate Snyder, the fourth annual Bpb Kincaid Intern, who would work
with the City Manager's Office this summer. He mentioned that the memorial internship fund has
received over $10,000 in private donations, which the City used to hire a summer intern. He
indicated that staff selected Ms. Snyder out of a field of 25 applicants to work on a broad range of
topics.
Ms. Snyder reviewed her educational background, noting that she was native to Washington
State. She thanked the Council for this opportunity to work with the City. Mayor Hoffman
welcomed Ms. Snyder.
3.2 Centennial Update
Cindy Thompson, Event Producer, described the Centennial Celebration scheduled for July 17
at Luscher Field. She mentioned the involvement of 56 community organizations, companies, and
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 1 of 28
non -profits, 14 local food vendors, 13 sponsors, and 17 entertainers plus a variety of other
activities scheduled for the all -day Celebration. She spoke next of the Farm Chic dinner at Luscher
Farm with a five -course dinner prepared by Lake Oswego chefs. The proceeds of the $150 a ticket
dinner would go to support the Lake Oswego School District Sustainability Fund. She reminded
the audience of the 10-10-10 Lock up of the time capsule in the vault on October 10.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor Jordan moved the Consent Agenda. Councilor Johnson seconded the motion. A
voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0)
4.1 REPORTS
4.1.1 Public Improvement Contract for construction of the 2010 Street Preservation Project
(Slurry Seal)
Action: Award a public improvement contract to Asphalt Maintenance, Inc for the 2010
Street Preservation Project in the amount of $206,644.08:
4.2 RESOLUTIONS
4.2.1 Resolution 10-23, authorizing a Joint Funding Agreement for the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) Clackamas River Water Quality Study
Action: Adopt Resolution 10-23
4.3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4.3.1 January 23, 2010, goal setting (morning portion)
4.3.2 April 6, 2010, regular meeting
Action: Approve minutes as written
END CONSENT AGENDA
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
6. CITIZEN COMMENT
• Gary Buford, 5 Camelot Court
He read a letter to the editor that he had written. He quoted a remark by Thomas Jefferson: "A
government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you
have." He referenced the discussion of the Foothills pre -development agreement by the Council at
its June 7 meeting. He described the location of the Foothills District and the constraints of the
100 -year flood plain, the Tryon Creek sewage treatment plant, the industrial use zoning, the
transportation access of only one road from Hwy 43, and the inferred dependence of the
development on the Tri -Met streetcar between Lake Oswego and Portland. He indicated that the
planning process would cost the taxpayer between $800,000 to $1.1 million. He remarked that the
City government appeared big enough to give one everything one wanted.
He commented that the work of the Second Look Task Force on the Sensitive Lands Ordinance
was now complete. He alleged that the City was likely to move ahead with the taking of more
private property rights. He asked whether City government was big enough to take away
everything one had.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 28
June 15, 2010
Diana Boom, PO Box 328, Lake Oswego
She presented the Council with a flyer publicizing that the Baghdad Theater's premier of
Sustainability Board member Matt Briggs' film Deep Green. She commented that the film was
excellent and sent out a good message.
Charles Ormsby, 170 SW Birdshill Road, Portland, Clackamas County
He informed the Council that, when he attempted to set up microphones in the center conference
pit in order to record the Council's special meeting on June 7 at the West End Building, he was
asked to remove them. Consequently, he had been unable to record adequate sound from the
meeting. He indicated that he found this request inexcusable, as the next night here in the Council
Chambers, cables were all over the place in the center of the table space. He said that he did not
think it was right that he had to work twice as hard to get a recording of a public meeting. He
stated that next time he would give adequate notice and that he did not expect to have his
microphone disturbed unless there was a safety issue.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mayor Hoffman discussed the six public hearings before the Council tonight. He acknowledged
the work of the Citizens Budget Committee (seven elected officials, seven citizens), superbly led by
Chair Ron Smith. He described the budget process as a four -stage relay race: the department
heads provided input to the City Manager; the City Manager put together a budget; the Budget
Committee approved a budget; and the Council adopted a budget per its statutory authorization
and its duty and responsibility to spend its citizens' tax dollars wisely. He explained that there was
extensive public input at each stage. He commented that the important element was trust of
government. He noted that the City Council was ordinary people's first interaction with
government.
7.1 Resolution 10 - 28, adjusting the budget for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2009
by adopting a supplemental budget, approving resources/requirements, and making
appropriations
Mayor Hoffman reviewed the standard public hearing procedures and testimony time limits.
STAFF REPORT
Ms. Euler presented the third supplemental budget for this fiscal year (pp.78-82). She mentioned
the reasons for supplemental budgets (p.77). She directed the Council to the quarterly financial
reports for the preparatory work. She reviewed the specific supplements for this budget
adjustment, as summarized on pp. 77-78. She mentioned that she should have included the Lake
Oswego/Tigard Water Partnership in the increases for personal services. She emphasized that
none of these funds were approaching their budget limit; this action was re -allocating monies within
budget categories to match where the money was actually spent.
She noted the $41,000 from the general fund supporting the lagging golf fund. She explained that
the internal service funds of Engineering and Maintenance Services & Motor Pool were not
receiving sufficient resources to reflect the costs incurred in providing services to other City funds
and/or projects. Therefore, this supplement made the necessary transfers between funds to
recover the full cost for the internal service funds.
She emphasized that this supplement did not go over -budget; it simply shifted previously
appropriated funds into the right categories.
QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Councilor Olson asked why staff was moving the capital outlay in the Tennis fund to personnel
(p.80). Ms. Euler clarified that the transfer within the self-supporting Tennis Fund was two different
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 28
June 15, 2010
items. One shifted savings from its capital outlay category to its materials and services category in
order to pay for the tennis study. Ms. Gilmer indicated that they transferred $9,000 to personnel in
order to pay for the additional staff needed to cover some workers involved in worker's comp
issues this past year. She said that they were not certain that they would need it, but they wanted
to make sure that they did not overrun the expense line.
Councilor Olson asked if the need to transfer monies from other funds to the Engineering fund
resulted from the new cost allocation study, or only the decreased license and fee revenues. Ms.
Euler indicated that this reflected the decrease in revenues only.
Ms. Euler clarified to Councilor Olson that the fund transfers to the Engineering fund were to pay
for real non -capital work that Engineering did for these other funds. She indicated that this had
nothing to do with the new cost allocation study, nor was it a subsidy.
Ms. Euler indicated to Councilor Tierney that there was a Redevelopment Department in the
General fund with one employee. However, LORA paid for that employee through an annual cost
reimbursement. She explained that, because vacation payout was typically unforeseen, they could
not realistically budget for it. Councilor Tierney suggested re-examining vacation payouts in the
future.
Ms. Euler clarified to Councilor Tierney that they transferred the $249,000 from the general fund
to the Street fund instead of directly to the Engineering fund because the Street fund received
services from Engineering and needed to pay for those services itself. Councilor Tierney
suggested eventually answering the question of what services the Engineering fund provided. He
commented that those services were really paid for through the utility rates.
Ms. Euler indicated to Councilor Jordan that the $150,000 in Fines & Forfeitures represented
money collected by the City from the losing party in the lawsuit and paid to the claimant as a
restitution payment.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. Seeing none, he closed the hearing.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Jordan moved to adopt Resolution 10-28. Councilor Johnson seconded the
motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors
Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
7.2 Resolution 10-29, certifying the City is eligible to receive State -Shared Revenues
STAFF REPORT
Mr. McIntyre explained that this staff report covered Agenda items 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4 in presenting
the budget as an entire package. He reviewed the procedure for the public hearings.
Ms. Euler reviewed the budget process leading to the public hearings tonight on this budget
approved by the Budget Committee. She mentioned the correction to the total Citywide approved
budget revenues listed in the staff report (p.83) to $134,670,000 and the correct $167,126,388 in
expenditures. She noted the General Fund budget shown on p. 84.
Mr. Wheeler gave a PowerPoint presentation reviewing the changes made between the City
Manager's proposed budget and the Budget Committee's approved budget (p.85, p. 89). He
mentioned each of the changes to the General Fund and to the other funds (pp.86-89). He noted
that these changes resulted in freeing up an additional $150,000 in the General Fund ongoing
resources and $160,000 in one-time resources.
Ms. Euler indicated that those freed up resources were the starting point. She informed the
Council of additional developments since the Budget Committee meetings. She reported that the
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 28
June 15, 2010
Library District informed staff that the monies for the Lake Oswego Library coming from the District
would increase by $230,000 as a result of the Clackatants vote to enter the Library District; Lake
Oswego's allocation percentage increased because they were most likely to visit the Lake Oswego
Library.
She indicated that staff reviewed the street maintenance fee charges to the Municipal Golf Course
and the Country Club Golf Course and determined that they should be at a Group 1 pricing level
instead of at a Group 2 pricing level. This reduced the revenue to the Street fund by $44,000. She
pointed out that this decrease in revenue to the Street fund meant an increased transfer from the
General fund in the same amount, but the change did benefit the Municipal Golf Course by
decreasing its monthly bill by $9,000.
She mentioned a staff request to add $100,000 to any refinancing plan for the West End Building
to repair the chiller needed to keep the building inhabitable in the summer ($50,000) and to provide
architectural support for a Council subcommittee reviewing the future uses of the West End
Building to find a solution ($50,000). She indicated that these additional revenues and subtractions
left $336,000 on the table in ongoing resources and $60,000 in one-time funds.
Mayor Hoffman indicated that Resolution 10-29, certifying that the City was eligible to receive
state -shared revenues, did not require a public hearing, while Resolution 10-30, in which the City
elected to receive said revenues, did require a public hearing.
Councilor Johnson moved Resolution 10-29. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
At Councilor Hennagin's request, Mr. Powell explained that, in order for Lake Oswego to receive
state -shared revenues, it had to provide certain services and certify each year that it did in fact
provide those services (Resolution 10-29). He indicated that the public hearing for Resolution 10-
30 was to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on the potential uses of the state
revenue sharing.
Mayor Hoffman noted that the City was eligible to receive state -shared revenues (cigarette, liquor,
and highway taxes) because it provided four or more municipal services.
A voice vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
7.3 Resolution 10-30, declaring the City of Lake Oswego's election to Receive State -
hared revenues in 2010 - 11
Mr. Powell reviewed the standard public hearing procedures and testimony time limits.
STAFF REPORT
Mayor Hoffman noted that the staff report on this resolution started on p. 101 in the packet.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. Seeing none, he closed the public
hearing.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Jordan moved adoption of Resolution 10-30. Councilor Johnson seconded the
motion.
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Olson that he was not aware of any restrictions or rules about
the use of state -shared revenues. He described them as unrestricted, in contrast to gas tax
monies. Ms. Euler indicated that the liquor and cigarette taxes went to the General fund.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 5 of 28
7.4 Resolution 10-31, adopting the City of Lake Oswego Budget for the Fiscal Year
commencing July 1, 2010, (Fiscal Year 2010 - 2011) making appropriations, levying
ad valorem taxes, and classifying the levy pursuant to Section 11 b, Article XI of the
Oregon Constitution
QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Councilor Tierney indicated that his calculations using the revenue, operating expenditures, debt
service, and capital outlay figures on p. 84 relating to the General fund budget found that the
expenditures were greater than the revenues. Ms. Euler clarified that the budget included the one-
time spending of $1.1 million for Foothills. She stated that staff did otherwise balance the budget
according to Council goals by providing excess operating revenues over operating expenditures.
Councilor Olson commented that she had noticed the same thing. Ms. Euler explained that the
difference, after backing out the $1.1 million, came from setting aside $600,000 for a PERS
reserve and funding a bare bones capital outlay.
Councilor Olson mentioned that the $37,000 in matching funds that the City was providing for the
Lakeridge tennis courts (p.87) went to the School District, the Lakeridge Parent Club, and the
neighborhood group that brought the matter forward to the Budget Committee, and not just to the
District.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony. Mr. Powell reviewed the testimony order
and time limits.
Dan Williams, 17226 Tualatin Street
He noted that a close vote during the Budget Committee process sustained the City Manager's
elimination of the EMS Coordinator position. He described the decision as shortsighted, citing the
compelling testimony presented at the June 5 Round Table from the many Fire Department
personnel on why the position should be restored. He asked the Council to reconsider the decision
for many reasons, one of which was the potential liability the City might have and the insurance
costs involved if the City did not have an EMS Coordinator.
Maria Meneghin, 1179 Sunningdale Road
She read a prepared statement regarding the allocation of $1.1 million from the General fund
reserves to the Foothills Framework Plan. She described the agreement proposed by Mr. Williams
as protecting the City's interests and bringing forward the City's best opportunity for future
development to increase its tax base, meet Metro's density expectations, and provide affordable
housing. She indicated that she liked the idea of a framework plan to guide development
opportunities in the District.
She stated that, even so, she could not support this allocation because of the continuing financial
problem of the West End Building. She noted that, at the June 8 meeting, the Council essentially
decided to postpone their decision. She acknowledged that there was no good solution to this
financial situation, yet the Council's decision to form a subcommittee to explore potential uses for
voter approval at an unspecified date disturbed her. She questioned whether a general obligation
bond would pass, given the close votes on the two other occasions. If it did not, then the City
might have to use its reserves to pay the debt, which she argued made spending $1.1 million on
Foothills at this time fiscally imprudent. She advocated for postponing the money for the Foothills
Framework Plan until after the City settled the West End Building issue.
Darrel Condra, 1179 Sunningdale Road
He expressed his appreciation for the Council's work over the past year, noting the long, difficult
meetings and contentious decisions that were part of this volunteer job. He said that he
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 28
June 15, 2010
appreciated the City's support for the library over the years and in this current budget. He
commented that public libraries became even more important for students as the School District
struggled with funding and reducing its library budget.
Karl Koenig, Clackamas County Firefighters Union President, PO Box 230104, Tigard
He indicated that he represented the 45 union fire fighters working for the City. He advocated for
reinstatement of the EMS Coordinator position. He mentioned his perception that the Council
intended to show its support for the Fire Department by doing so. He thanked the Council and the
Budget Committee for their service. He expressed his appreciation that the firefighters had an
opportunity to testify with respect to this position and its effect on the community they served. He
commented that they believed in a participatory management style that allowed firefighters an
opportunity to comment and to interact with the City leadership in making their service better.
Janine Dunphy, 15450 Boones Ferry Road
She stated that she attended all the budget meetings and diligently went through the proposed FY
2010/2011 budget. She indicated that she had many concerns, including the salary and benefit
increases for staff. She noted that 50% of the total operating budget in the General fund was for
salaries and personnel costs. She advocated reducing the development and training budget by
more than 10%.
She expressed her shock at the amount of money allocated to professional and technical services
across the departments, mentioning a total of $3.615 million, not including the $1.1 million for
Foothills. She mentioned that she has not yet seen a list of all the consultants hired by the City,
what they were doing, and where this money was going. She argued that these expenses were
not sustainable. She asked if this was how the citizens wanted the money spent.
She mentioned that she has not seen the results of the City's April citizen interest survey, which
were due out in May but now scheduled for July. She commented that she would have thought
that the Council would have wanted to see those results before the budget, which made her
wonder whether the results did not favor some of the budget items.
Eric Schult, 763 Ninth Street
He spoke in favor of retaining the EMS Coordinator position. He argued that the City needed a
position dedicated to moving the department forward with all the changes likely to happen in the
next five to ten years with respect to emergency medical services.
He indicated to Councilor Hennagin that he had specialized knowledge, as he has been involved
in EMS for 29 years, worked as the EMS Training Officer at another fire department, and was
currently involved in State EMS. He stated that they were seeing a tremendous amount of
changes in EMS because of the medical science and technological developments. He commented
that the paramedic program he went through 25 years ago would not have even thought of doing
the things that would soon be implemented.
Councilor Hennagin mentioned hearing that the Lake Oswego fire fighters could receive
adequate training through Multnomah or Clackamas County, rather than receiving it in-house. Mr.
Schult commented that Lake Oswego had some unique geographic challenges that should be
included in its training program. He indicated that his fire district has found that it was not cost
effective to send its people outside for training because of the time lost for responding and the
overtime. He argued that it made more sense financially to keep the training in house. He
remarked that having a dedicated Lake Oswego fire person attending regional or countywide
meetings could bring back efficiencies and other ways to reduce costs that would benefit the
department.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 7 of 28
Colleen Bennett, 1131 Oxford Drive
She read from a prepared statement regarding the library funding. She reviewed her involvement
with the library over the past 20 years, including sitting on the Advisory Board and working with the
Friends and with the LO Reads program. She mentioned the excellent service provided by Library
Director Baar and his staff under difficult and crowded conditions in the library building. She
advocated for the Council to continue to fund the library from the General fund as it has in the past
and reserve the Library District monies for the future.
Ritu Sahni, Lake Oswego Fire Department Medical Director, 5525 Bay Creek Drive
He explained that, in addition to serving as the Lake Oswego Fire Department Medical Director, he
was also the Medical Director for the State of Oregon. He mentioned that the increased
requirements for paramedic training would likely increase. He spoke in support of the Council
retaining the EMS Coordinator position. He said that, in his position as Medical Director, he saw
nationally that the departments successful in providing EMS care were the departments committed
to providing that care, including a management structure dedicated to EMS.
He described the Lake Oswego Fire Department as an EMS -based fire service, as opposed to a
fire -based EMS service. He noted that 85% of their calls had an EMS component to them. EMS
was the primary public safety and health aspect provided by the City.
Diana Boom, PO Box 328, Lake Oswego
She thanked the Budget Committee, Mr. McIntyre, and his budget team for the great job they did
with the budget. She supported two suggestions made by Budget Committee members for
improving the budget next year: that the City define, list, and prioritize services as essential or
non-essential services, and that the City provide more detail in the two categories of development
and training and professional and technical services.
She spoke in support of retaining the funding for the skate park and the swim park lifeguard. She
questioned eliminating the funding in light of the City giving $30,000 to a non -City entity, calling it ill
advised. She argued for the neighborhood planners to return to working on neighborhoods plans
instead of being re -assigned to work on the Comprehensive Plan. She contended that the
Comprehensive Plan should be more than a marketing plan, citing her dismay at the time and
money it must have taken to develop the board display of logos presented to the Council last week.
She held that eliminating the funding for the Police Community Service Officer and the Fire
Department EMS Coordinator was unwise in the long term. She remarked that the perception that
the City cut employees and funded consultants was not good. She stated her opposition to
spending over $1 million from the reserves to fund the Foothills agreement with these developers
at this time.
She described this year's budget as having more style than substance. She cited the spending of
more money over the last two years on the Centennial Celebration than on the EMS Coordinator
and the Community Service Officer.
John Surrett, LONAC Chairperson, 1685 Edgecliff Terrace
He remarked that the LONAC members who attended the Budget Committee meetings had been
impressed at the time provided in the agenda at every meeting for citizens to speak. He
acknowledged the diligent and thorough work done by the Committee members before making
their recommendations.
He indicated that the LONAC Budget Committee studied the proposed FY 2010/2011 budget. He
reported that the LONAC members unanimously adopted the following positions recommended by
the LONAC Budget Committee at the June 7 LONAC meeting.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page -8of 28
June 15. 2010
He argued that, in order to keep the quality neighborhood plan development essential to the quality
of life in Lake Oswego, the City should retain full staffing for neighborhood planning. He indicated
that re -assigning the neighborhood planners to the Comprehensive Plan as an alternate to
neighborhood planning was not acceptable.
He addressed the issue of funding speculative proposals and development projects. He cited the
large capital improvement projects, such as Foothills ($1.1 to $1.3 million), the Tigard water
agreement ($200 million), the streetcar and other projects. He argued that when these projects
were delayed or cancelled, their staff requirements should be cut and their general fund allocations
eliminated and/or reallocated.
He contended that these proposals affected the quality of life in Lake Oswego during these
recessionary times by affecting the affordability of the community and the citizens' ability to
continue to live in Lake Oswego. He stated that the property tax reserves should not be depleted
to pay for consultants on speculative development projects. He argued that developing Foothills
and the streetcar did not enhance the quality of life in Lake Oswego. He held that this expenditure
of reserve funds in advance of the Lake Oswego 2015 financial outlook was an ill-advised use of
reserves that the City might need for more critical services later on.
He observed that the General fund reserves had only $18 million but the line of credit on the West
End Building was $20 million. He noted that the terms of the loan required that the reserves be
equivalent to the outstanding principal owed on the loan, which put all reserves in jeopardy if the
loan was called. He argued that the reserves should be maintained at no less than the level of the
principal owing on the line of credit loan.
He contended that continuing to spend property tax dollars for a speculative real estate investment
with no determined use, no demonstrated identifiable revenue generation, and no long term
financing options was not acceptable and not a prudent management of taxpayer dollars. He
spoke of resolving the disposition of the West End Building in 10 to 12 months.
He discussed the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) forecast and budgeting and staffing
requirements. LONAC agreed with the City Manager that the City had to get back to basic
baseline services. Therefore, the long-term plans should follow the baseline service requirements.
He spoke of a regular re -assessment of the ratio of supervisory staff to work staff when matching
CIP proposed programs and current baseline staffing requirements.
He contended that economic development was not a baseline City function, but rather a Chamber
and private sector business promotion role. He argued that the City should not have created the
Economic Development Department because the citizens did not request it. He held that the
businesses that did request it should pay for it. He indicated that if there was no measurable
progress by the end of 2011, then the City should discontinue the department, eliminate the
director position, and return the activities to the private sector. He mentioned LONAC's support of
eliminating the Economic Development half-time administrative assistant in this year's budget.
He addressed budget transparency, reserve identification, and actual budget reporting. He argued
that the ending funding balance reserves should be clearly identified by department, and not rolled
up into one mega -general fund reserve account. He advocated for bi-monthly reporting of actual to
budget in all General fund accounts for the benefit of the citizens. He suggested publishing the
reports in Hello LO.
He discussed full faith and credit obligation bonding and the City's bond rating notification. He
stated that the City's new practice of issuing full faith and credit obligation bonding without a full
disclosure to the citizens, property owners, and taxpayers of Lake Oswego before issuing the
bonds was not acceptable. He described this practice as a skirting of the voter approval
requirements for general obligation bonding, as the collateral for both types of bond was the
aggregate assessed value of all property in the city. He alleged that the LOIS bonds were an
example of the Council deciding not to request voter approval of such bonds.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 28
June 15, 2010
He stated that the City had to be accurate when publicizing bond rating house ratings of Lake
Oswego bonds before bond application. He spoke to including the definitions of the three types of
bonds in the budget glossary (full faith and credit, general obligation, and revenue).
Mr. Surrett indicated to Councilor Johnson that LONAC had a quorum for its vote with about 20
people voting.
Peter Sweet, 796 First Street
He read the June 21 letter he sent to the Council expressing his dismay at including over $1 million
for planning the Foothills/streetcar project in this year's budget. He referenced the April 13
development study session with Bruce Wood. He stated that he was a retired banker with over 45
years of experience. He described the current down cycle as the worst he has ever seen. He
concurred with most commercial development experts that the equity and debt pieces for funding
major commercial projects were dead in the water for the next decade.
He argued that the Mayor's conclusion that public money had to replace the lack of private
resources to build the Foothills project and the streetcar extension was wrong. He disagreed that
the City should take the development risk because private sources were not available. He
commented that the reasons that private sources were not available was the uncertainty of
financing with the glut of condo real estate yet to be worked off and competent developers having
burned through their own equity and private banker equity.
He commented that, adding to these difficult to overcome financial risks, the City was proposing to
develop a risky location with multiple issues. He questioned why any competent developer team
would want to team up with the City, given its development track record with the West End
Building, the US Bank project, and City Hall, unless the developer intended to shift the project risk
to the City. He alleged that the selected developer for the Foothills project had a checkered record
of success, depending on boom/bust cycles.
He argued that the City did not possess the skill sets necessary to embark on this risky
development in a down cycle. He recalled that the case presented at the May 7 First Addition
meeting for building the streetcar mentioned providing an alternative for 500 cars. He asked where
the study was that showed how many Lake Oswego residents would choose this mode of
commuting. He held that there was too much at stake to have a 'build it and they will come'
attitude towards this project. He stated that he did not believe that they needed to adopt a `new
normal,' but rather they needed to husband their resources and wait to see what happened as they
crawled out of this recession.
He mentioned that Mayor Hoffman and one Councilor responded to his e-mail, and the Mayor
attended the monthly FAN meeting. He indicated that the Mayor's rebuttal to his e-mail had been
that the City needed to plan now in order to be ready for the next upturn in real estate. He said
that, in response to his question about what due diligence the City had done in selecting
Williams/Dame & White, the Mayor explained that several Foothills property owners selected the
firm and that the City accepted the company.
He indicated that his understanding of the Mayor's answer as the City was hiring a developer, on
which it has done only cursory checking, who also represented the landowners, with whom the City
would have to negotiate a land purchase price in the future. He said that he interpreted the
Mayor's response as the City was providing Williams/Dame & White with interim consulting income
with no risk to the company, as it weathered its own real estate turn down.
Gary Gipson, 19 EI Greco
He mentioned that he attended all the Budget Committee meetings and was in awe of all the work
put in. He stated that he disagreed with some of the outcomes. He referenced an article in the
Oregonian last week about the Portland Development Commission having spent $13 million buying
South Waterfront land for affordable housing but most of the money has gone to the lead
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 28
June 15, 2010
developer. The article also mentioned the economic downturn and the various failures and
shortcomings of the project.
He commented that the Council was preparing to allocated $1.1 million in Lake Oswego funds and
enter into a pre -development agreement (PDA) for the Foothills project with the same developers
while the economic downturn was still in full swing and Portland property values forecasted to
decrease by 10% a year for the next three years.
He observed that the Foothills project was completely intertwined with the streetcar program. He
argued that the controversial streetcar program was being advanced contrary to studies indicating
that it would do little to alleviate the congestion on Highway 43. He mentioned the City's annual
interest only payments on the West End Building ranging from $200,000 to $300,000 a year
currently but with the potential of increasing to $1 million per year as interest rates rose.
He commented that, although Lake Oswego was not currently in a financial crisis, its economic
position was precarious at best. He argued that continuing the Foothills and streetcar projects in
this economy was neither responsible nor in the best interests of the city. He held that the City
should complete a new flood plain study of the Foothills area before spending additional funds on
any contractual agreements regarding the project.
Mayor Hoffman closed the public hearing.
Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting for a break at 8:20 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at
8:30 p.m.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Hennagin moved to adopt Resolution 10-31 for discussion purposes. Councilor
Johnson seconded the motion.
Councilor Olson expressed her appreciation to all the citizens who testified this evening. She
said that she was disappointed that they were laying off some good employees. She spoke in
support of reinstating the EMS Coordinator position. She cited the new information provided to the
Council at the June 5 Round Table regarding this position.
Councilor Olson moved to reinstate the EMS coordinator position in the Fire Department.
Councilor Moncrieff seconded the motion.
Councilor Jordan mentioned that she did not attend the final Budget Committee meeting. She
expressed her appreciation for the work done by the Budget Committee and the staff in getting the
budget to this point. She spoke in support of the motion. She recalled the Budget Committee's
discussion about cutting technical training and services and preserving training and services for fire
and police, which were critical services for the community.
She commented that even critical services needed to make sure that their departments ran as
efficiently and effectively as any other department, including making changes to save the taxpayers
money while providing the same kinds of services. She mentioned the personnel contract issues
that the Council and the Budget Committee did not always understand which required
management level personnel to do certain things.
Councilor Hennagin commented that he had a mixed reaction to the motion. He recalled that the
Fire Chief told the Budget Committee that he could get by without this position because his people
could get the necessary training through other sources. He referenced the testimony heard tonight
from the Union President and other fire department personnel giving convincing information for
retaining this position. He asked to postpone this motion until the Council obtained more
information about the overtime and the countervailing costs potentially incurred by eliminating the
position versus keeping the EMS Coordinator position.
Mayor Hoffman indicated that he supported the motion.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 28
June 15, 2010
Councilor Moncrieff said that she would support the motion, although she too had a difficult time
with this area of the budget. She suggested filling the position for one year while the City
examined the most efficient and effective way of providing this service, and then revisiting it in one
year.
Councilor Tierney recalled that he had voted to eliminate the position at the Budget Committee,
but after spending more time on it, he became aware of the merits of putting it back in. Therefore,
he would vote in support of the motion.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilor Hennagin voted `no.' [6-1]
Mr. McIntyre noted that Mr. Wheeler would track the changes on the white board and keep a
running total.
Mr. Wheeler asked the Council to affirm the proposed management changes relating to the
additional funds from the library levy and the transfers into the Street fund and the Golf fund. Mr.
McIntyre pointed out that accepting the management amendments changed the amount of money
the Council had to appropriate through amendments.
Mayor Hoffman indicated that he would entertain a motion to accept the management changes as
an amendment to the base resolution, acknowledging the library levy, the revenue shortage, and
the transfers from the General fund.
Councilor Tierney asked for clarification on the transfer from the General fund to the Street fund.
He pointed out that they could reduce the increased capital in the Street fund by $44,000 and keep
the $44,000 in the General Fund. Mr. McIntyre concurred. He explained that staff's intent was to
restore the numbers approved by the Budget Committee.
Councilor Hennagin moved to amend the budget to increase the library levy income by
$230,000 to reflect the new figure coming from the County library levy. Councilor Jordan
seconded the motion.
Ms. Euler confirmed to Councilor Olson that the $230,000 resulted from a combination of
Tualatin coming into the Clackamas County Library District and the increase in collection rates on
property taxes countywide from 93% to 96%. She indicated that this was separate from the
County property tax revenue and would not affect it.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
Mr. McIntyre explained that the $44,000 transfer resulted from a recalculation of the Street
Maintenance Fund for the two golf courses, which significantly lowered the fee for the golf courses.
He indicated that staff wanted to make sure that the budget for the Street fund reflected the
reduction. He reiterated that the Council did not have to make the transfer; staff could lower the
amount of street maintenance performed in FY 2010/2011.
Councilor Johnson moved to transfer $44,000 from the General Fund to the Street Fund.
Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Councilor Tierney spoke in opposition to the motion. He argued for keeping the money in the
General fund where the City had more latitude to use it for potential expenditures, and where the
City might not spend it before the end of the year. He noted that the capital outlay in the Street
fund doubled from last year to $1.5 million. He commented that they could always move this
money to the Street fund later if there was a demonstrated need.
Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Hennagin that not having the $44,000 in the Street fund
would not likely affect the City's average Pavement Condition Index (PCI). He explained to
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 28
June 15, 2010
Councilor Tierney that staff would use whatever amount of money the Council budgeted for streets
to do the street work. The more money budgeted, the more streets staff did, and vice versa.
Councilor Moncrieff spoke in support of the motion. She said that it was a priority for her to bring
the infrastructure up higher than its current level. She agreed that it was a small amount, but she
would like to see it put towards resurfacing or slurry seals.
Mr. McIntyre confirmed to Councilor Jordan that the City could use Street fund monies to
resurface pathways. Councilor Jordan spoke in the support of the motion, observing that bringing
some pathways back up to shape where people did not trip would be a good use of the money.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Moncrieff, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilors Olson and Tierney voted 'no'. [5-
2]
Councilor Johnson moved to decrease golf materials and expenditures by $9,000.
Councilor Olson seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with
Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan
voting `aye.' [7-0]
Mr. McIntyre spoke to the $50,000 placeholder he requested to add to the budget for the architect
consultant that the Council subcommittee on the West End Building would need. He explained that
he wanted to have enough money to fund the need adequately but he did not have a scope of work
yet to use in pricing the work.
He reminded the Council that the City needed a chiller in the West End Building to cool the building
this summer, or the building would not be habitable. He mentioned staff's reluctance to invest
significant funds into the facility, not knowing what its future was. He explained that one chiller has
completely failed and the other desperately in need of repair. He noted that the funds for both
these items were one-time uses.
Councilor Jordan moved to allocate $50,000 as a placeholder for the study of the West End
Building and $50,000 as a placeholder for the chiller in the West End Building. Councilor
Hennagin seconded the motion.
Mr. McIntyre confirmed to Councilor Olson that he proposed repairing the chiller rather than
spending a quarter million dollars to replace it. He explained that he preferred to keep repairing
the chiller over time, as he did not know what the use of the facility would be. He pointed out that a
new chiller had a life expectancy of 15 to 20 years. Councilor Olson expressed concern at
spending money to repair it and then replacing it next year. Mr. McIntyre compared the chiller to
an old car: at some point, it would stop running.
Councilor Hennagin spoke in support of budgeting for a process that would, in the long run, save
the citizens money by determining what action to take on the WEB and how to finance it.
Councilor Tierney commented that he thought that the Budget Committee deliberations should
have considered both these items, especially the financing question, but the May 1 date slipped.
He said that he would oppose the motion on principle.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Moncrieff, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilors Olson and Tierney voted `no'. [5-
2]
Councilor Jordan commented that one could construe the Lakeridge tennis courts resurfacing as
a neighborhood enhancement grant, given that the Lakeridge and Palisades neighborhoods jointly
requested funding. She suggested reducing the $20,000 allocation to the Neighborhood
Enhancement Grant program to $5,000 and shifting $15,000 towards the $30,000 for the tennis
courts. She asked staff to review the neighborhood grant program throughout this year in terms of
what it should look like and what it should fund, with an eye to whether to keep the program or not.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 28
June 15, 2010
She described the economic and capital development issues as an important part of what the City
was doing right now. She argued that, regardless of what happened with Foothills, the City would
not know what could happen there without studying it. She commented that the Economic
Development Department would make sure that the studies, for which part of the $1.1 million paid,
were properly done. She held that it was "penny wise and pound foolish" to eliminate the $33,000
for Economic Development in light of the $1.1 million for the Foothills plan.
Councilor Jordan moved to reduce the Neighborhood Enhancement Grant program from
$20,000 to $5,000, to transfer $15,000 from the Neighborhood Enhancement Grant line item
to the Lakeridge Tennis Court project, and to reduce the Lakeridge tennis court allocation
by a like amount. Councilor Hennagin seconded the motion.
Mayor Hoffman asked if the Council could declare the Lakeridge tennis courts a neighborhood
grant from the dais. Councilor Olson said that the neighborhood planners administered the
program.
Councilor Moncrieff indicated her support for the motion, citing the Palisades Neighborhood
Association's support of resurfacing the tennis courts as a neighborhood amenity. She held that
this was an appropriate allocation of those funds.
Councilor Olson spoke against the motion. She said that she thought it circumvented the
neighborhood grant program application process. She disagreed with linking the grant program
reduction to the Lakeridge tennis courts.
Councilor Tierney spoke against the motion and in support of affirming the Budget Committee's
decision.
Councilor Johnson indicated that she would vote against the motion in support of the currently
budgeted amount. She recalled that she supported the increased neighborhood grant funding
because the City was re -assigning the neighborhood planners to the Comprehensive Plan.
Councilor Hennagin asked how taking away the neighborhood planners had anything to do with
the neighborhood enhancement grant program, given that the program was for beautification
improvements. Councilor Johnson explained that, while the planners and the grant program did
not do the same thing, she saw both of them as an investment in the neighborhoods.
Mayor Hoffman said that he would oppose the motion, although he supported the tennis courts.
He commented that he thought they could have both the increased funding and the resurfaced
tennis courts.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motion failed with Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, and
Jordan voting `aye.' Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Olson, and Tierney voted `no.' [3-
4]
Councilor Olson moved to remove the $1.1 million budgeted for Foothills. Councilor
Tierney seconded the motion for discussion.
Councilor Olson stated that she did not oppose redeveloping Foothills at the right time and in the
right way with a sound financial plan. She indicated that she understood that the $1.1 million was
a one-time expenditure out of reserves that would not be available for other things, if eliminated
from the budget. She explained that she would be more comfortable waiting until Tri -Met repaid
the $1.5 million loan from Lake Oswego reserves in 2012 before spending this additional money
out of reserves.
She acknowledged the argument that Foothills was a Council goal, but pointed out that there were
other Council goals not funded this year. She indicated that, until the capital markets improved
and there was more private money available to share the risk, she was not comfortable reducing
the General fund by this amount this year.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 28
June 15, 2010
Councilor Hennagin spoke against the motion. He pointed out that the agreement with
Williams/Dame & White contained off ramps for the City to opt out of the agreement, should the
study determine that any factor precluded viable development of the site. He mentioned the LLC
formed by Foothills property owners that had an agreement with Williams/Dame & White to move
ahead with planning. He observed that this was a complex project with many factors, participants,
and agencies involved; the planning process could well take four to five years.
He held that when commercial development money became available, it would come to Lake
Oswego because of the attractiveness of the community to people of different ages. He argued
that it would be a mistake for the City not to begin the planning process, especially with an
agreement that allowed the City to opt out if the planning process found insurmountable
roadblocks.
Councilor Jordan concurred with Councilor Hennagin in supporting this investment of City
resources at this time. She contended that one of the reasons that nothing happened in Foothills
during one of the biggest development booms in Oregon's history was the fact that these obstacles
were mostly public works problems. She argued that the area would have redeveloped had the
unknowns that this $1.1 million would help ascertain already been known. She spoke of being
prepared for what would happen in the next go round.
Councilor Tierney indicated that he did not support the motion. He explained that he supported
this expenditure because this was the area in Lake Oswego with an opportunity to increase the tax
base to generate more revenue for the citizens. He argued that it was critical to study it and to look
at it as an investment. He acknowledged that the area posed numerous obstacles that they had to
overcome before getting to the economic model.
He mentioned his intention to make sure that the economic model made sense for the citizens, the
City, the private property owners, and the developers. He held that the financial basis should be
the primary focus with the ancillary quality of life issues secondary to that. He commented that,
while no one had a certain answer to the question of whether this was the right time to begin this
long planning process, he was inclined to think that it was, given the variables in place, such as the
property owners and the developers ready to go.
Councilor Olson stated her opinion that the main question was whether it was the right time. She
said that she did not think that this was the right time. She agreed that the Foothills area
represented an opportunity for new housing options and keeping increased density out of the
neighborhoods. She questioned funding this project in light of the service and personnel cuts
discussed in the City Manager's memo as "being a condition of slow revenues, increasing costs,
and economic uncertainty."
Councilor Hennagin commented that they were not funding this project with money that the City
could use for other General fund purposes. He pointed out that the Budget Committee citizen
members, who looked for ways to save money, voted to allocate these funds after listening to
staff's presentation on the proposed agreement.
Mayor Hoffman said that he would oppose the motion because it focused on the wrong thing. He
indicated that his comments were in response to Mr. Sweet. He explained that this was not a
developer agreement but rather a pre -development agreement with the intent of identifying
potential obstacles to developing Foothills. He argued that Foothills was the last opportunity for
development in Lake Oswego for all practical purposes, and the only opportunity to bring the river
to the downtown, which was the heart of the Lake Oswego community.
He reminded those who had not been here in the late 1990s and early 2000s that those Councils
took calculated risks in making investments in the best interests of the public. He emphasized that
these projects were public/private partnerships. He emphasized that this would help determine
whether the Foothills area was developable. He spoke of catching the inevitable next real estate
cycle.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 15 of 28
A roll call vote was taken, and the motion failed with Councilor Olson voting `aye.' Mayor
Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voted `no.' [1-6]
Councilor Moncrieff moved to reinstate the $33,000 for a half-time administrative position
and the $9,000 for rent in the Economic Development budget in the General Fund.
Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Councilor Moncrieff argued that, in these hard economic times, it was important to invest in the
economic vitality and development of Lake Oswego. She described this position as a good use of
human resources to free up the Economic Development people to pursue economic development
while leaving the administrative jobs to an administrative person. She commented that she saw
the importance of having the Department in the downtown to work with LORA and Foothills.
Councilor Hennagin commented that he had thought that the Budget Committee made a mistake
in not having an administrative assistant to relieve the highly paid professionals from doing their
own routine clerical work. He indicated that, even so, over -turning the Budget Committee decision
presented a dilemma to him.
Councilor Tierney indicated that he would vote against the motion. He described a domino effect
in moving the Economic Development Department from City Hall, causing a $9,000 rental expense
and a $33,000 personnel expense. He pointed out that LORA paid the other half of those
expenses, which doubled the expenditure. He argued that they should have kept the department
in City Hall as part of a better utilization of the building space.
Councilor Johnson spoke to the Council being smart about how it invested money. She
described having an administrative person as a more efficient way of managing a department. She
pointed out that this department would still need additional administrative support even if it stayed
in City Hall. She indicated that she would support the motion.
Mayor Hoffman said that he would support the motion for the same reasons. He argued that it
was important to allow the Economic Development team to do their work for the City efficiently. He
commented that Mr. McIntyre would report to the Council next year on whether it made a difference
having the team in the Downtown.
Councilor Johnson stated that the citizens have asked for economic development. She
mentioned the long history of economic development in the community, noting that the Festival of
the Arts started as an economic development program to get people buying locally in the
Downtown. She pointed out that supporting local businesses was an element of sustainability.
She argued that it was time to support the businesses that supported the City.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motion passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Moncrieff, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilors Hennagin, Olson, and Tierney voted `no'. [4-
3]
Councilor Moncrieff asked the City Manager to look for any possible efficiencies or opportunities
for the City to work with the School District to assist it in these difficult financial times. Mr.
McIntyre indicated that he has been talking with Dr. Korach about continuing to find areas of
cooperation and partnership between the City and the District, which he would report on to the
Council this summer. He commented that it was difficult because of Measure 5. He mentioned the
City's cooperative arrangement with the District respecting recreation services, which they would
continue to discuss.
Mr. Wheeler indicated to Councilor Tierney that there were $254,000 in unappropriated funds left
on the tracking board. Councilor Tierney observed that a City this size could find some way to
use those funds in the coming year. He advocated putting them in the General Fund, as opposed
to the reserves, because of the latitude allowed by the General Fund.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 16 of 28
Councilor Tierney moved to allocate the unappropriated $254,000 to the General Fund
Contingency. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Councilor Jordan commented that she supported the motion because she thought there were
opportunities to use the money to leverage matching grants and other monies that the City might
find in enhancement or pathways grants.
Councilor Olson indicated that she supported the motion because this was close to the amount
that the Budget Committee did not approve for the maintenance and restoration of natural areas
and open space. She speculated that the Council would likely be interested in funding that item
after receiving the Second Look Task Force report.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
Councilor Hennagin moved to adopt Resolution 10-31 (the FY 2010/2011 budget) as
amended (nine amendments). Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Mr. Powell mentioned the note received by the Council today that the citywide revenue mentioned
in Resolution 10-31 needed to be adjusted by $87,000 for reduced property taxes and the bonded
debt fund.
Councilor Johnson moved to amend Resolution 10-31 to adjust the citywide revenue by the
sum of $87,000, which also resulted in the same net change to the total unappropriated
reserves. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motion
passed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and
Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
A roll call vote was taken on the main motion, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman,
Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilor
Olson voted `no'. [6-1]
7.5 Resolution 10-32 of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Lake Oswego Public
Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings and approving a
special procurement for administration of City Public Arts Programs; and authorizing
the Mayor to sign a three-year contract with the Arts Council of Lake Oswego for
FY10-11 through FY12-13
STAFF REPORT
Ms. Gilmer introduced Cheryl Brock, Lake Oswego Arts Council Executive Director. She
mentioned that the Council just approved $100,000 in the FY 2010/2011 budget for City public art
programming. She explained that a special procurement was needed to award the funds to the
Arts Council for administrating the City Public Arts programs without going through the public
bidding process. If the Council agreed with the staff findings (p.110), then the next step was
awarding a three-year contract to the Arts Council.
She explained that, even though the budget allocated funds for only one year, a three-year
contract made it easier to administer the programs over a long period (p.109). She mentioned that
the contract did not limit the Council to allocating the same level of funding from year to year, if it
chose to modify the amount.
Councilor Jordan expressed her appreciation for this coming forward. She recalled the
discussion during the Council goal -setting session of the importance of the arts to the quality of life
in Lake Oswego. She noted that this three-year contract helped the Arts Foundation secure other
funding because it was more stable than a one-year deal.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mr. Powell reviewed the standard hearing procedure and testimony time limits.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 28
June 15, 2010
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony.
• Diana Boom, PO Box 328, Lake Oswego
She commented that Cheryl Brock has done a great job as the Executive Director of the Arts
Council. She mentioned that she has worked with her on the Gallery without Walls.
Mayor Hoffman closed the public hearing.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Jordan moved Resolution 10-32 of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the
Lake Oswego Public Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings
and approving a special procurement for administration of City Public Arts Programs; and
authorizing the Mayor to sign a three-year contract with the Arts Council of Lake Oswego
for FY10-11 through FY12-13. Councilor Tierney seconded the motion.
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Hennagin that his wife working in a non -remunerative role as a
volunteer on the Arts Council did not require him to recuse himself, as that was not a technical
conflict of interest.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
7.6 Resolution 10-33, a resolution of the Lake Oswego City Council, acting as the Lake
Oswego Public Contract Review Board pursuant to ORS 279A.060, making findings
and approving a special procurement for services related to development of a
framework plan together with proposed Comprehensive Plan and Code Amendments
for the Foothills Area; and authorizing the Mayor to sign a predevelopment
agreement for the Foothills Area
Resolution 10-34, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
declaring official intent to reimburse certain expenditures from Urban Renewal
Funds, including proceeds of indebtedness
STAFF REPORT
Mr. Williams introduced Matt Brown, Williams/Dame & White. He noted that Christie White
and Dike Dame were in the audience to answer questions.
He explained that the first resolution (10-33) adopted findings and approved a special procurement
for work related to the Foothills Area as an exemption to the competitive bidding process. In
addition, the resolution authorized the Mayor to sign the Foothills pre -development agreement
(PDA) for predevelopment planning work in the 120 -acre Foothills District (industrial area, Oswego
Pointe, and Oswego Village).
He indicated that the second resolution (10-34) preserved the Council's option to reimburse the
General fund for the General fund expenditures proposed this evening. The reimbursement would
come from the potential LORA funds from a new or an extended urban renewal district in the
Foothills area.
He reviewed the background of the Foothills development efforts, the Council's direction to staff to
draft an agreement with Williams/Dame & White and the property owners, and the opportunities
that Foothills brought to the community (pp. 169-170). He reviewed the objectives of the PDA
(pp.170-171). These included a shared vision and planning principles, infrastructure and
development issues, financial feasibility, property assemblage, and strong project management.
He mentioned the parties to the agreement (p.171). He referenced the work plan, budget, and
schedule contained in Exhibit C of the agreement (pp.211-246). He spoke of the funding strategy
and termination clauses (p.172). He described the project oversight elements (p.171); including an
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 18 of 28
Oversight Committee, a City technical staff committee, and a City project manager. He
commented that the public participation element was important to the success of the project
(p.171), since the plan had to be acceptable to the community.
He indicated that the Framework Plan was the main element containing the deliverables (the
significant structural and public works issues needing resolution) and the implementation products
(the code and regulatory amendments needed to move forward). He listed the significant issues:
the flood plain, the wastewater treatment plant, access to Hwy 43, a workable street plan, parking,
the streetcar extension, environmental issues. He mentioned other issues of concern, including
public infrastructure, public facilities, no negative financial impact to the School District, open
space, urban form, and land use. He stated that this should have no negative affect on the School
District.
He noted that City would have to make extensive efforts to put all the implementation products in
place in order to allow the development to occur. He presented a list of the wide variety of
disciplines involved in addressing the various issues and hurdles to the development. He reviewed
the budget ($1.3 million) and the funding sources (p.172). He commented that the $525,000 fee
for Williams/Dame & White was a reasonable fee for all the project management, public outreach
services, and land use expertise that the company would provide.
He indicated that the City could terminate the contract at any time with no cause, and the parties
involved could mutually agree to terminate the contract if any of the significant elements within the
development were not financially feasible (p.172). He mentioned the concurrent work on the
development agreement (p.172-173). He noted the importance of the urban renewal plan (p.173),
which would also be done in conjunction with the PDA. He commented that there was a
complementary resolution to Resolution 10-43 before the LORA Board regarding reimbursement of
the General fund with future tax increment revenues (p.173).
Mr. Brown said that Williams/Dame & White has been working in the Foothills area since late
2008. He described the area was one of the best opportunities in the Metro area for urban infill
development. He indicated that six property owners selected their company through a request for
proposal process as the best company to handle the complexity of issues that they were facing in
trying to redevelop their 12 acres of property. He indicated that the location of this property
between Lake Oswego's thriving downtown and the Willamette River and the public park
investments already made by the City in the area were strong positive attributes on which they
could build.
He referenced the question of 'why was now a good time to do this work.' He stated that they
believed strongly that these downturns gave cities, private developers, and others in the real estate
business a good opportunity to plan for the next cycle and to be ready when it emerged. He
recalled the point made that not much activity has occurred in the Foothills area. He commented
that that was true of similar properties that also did not have the correct zoning or resolution of
flood plain, infrastructure, or environmental issues needed to attract capital investment to the area.
He commented that the goal of this planning process was to set the table for development by
creating an attractive investment opportunity of the entire 120 acres. He stated their belief that
there would be multiple opportunities for multiple developers to build the City's vision for the area.
He stated that, over the next 20 months, they hoped to remove the development obstacles
currently in place. He indicated that they would work hard to make sure that the citizens' voices
were heard throughout the process, as it was important to produce a publicly supported plan. He
mentioned a final goal of producing a plan that achieved results on the ground, and not one that
sat on the shelf.
He explained that the PDA only took the project through the planning phase. He emphasized the
multiple opportunities to terminate the contract, should any obstacle stop the development. He
pointed out that there was no real obligation on the City beyond this initial planning phase. The
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 28
June 15, 2010
development agreement would have to stand on its own merits and make financial sense for the
City and the private sector in order to move forward.
He stated that they were confident and had a great deal of professional experience in managing
this kind of multi -disciplinary, multi -issue complex project. He indicated that they looked forward to
working with the Council, the City staff, and the public to move this project forward.
QUESTIONS OF STAFF
Mr. Powell indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the Council was required to hold a public
hearing only on Resolution 10-33, but it could include Resolution 10-34, if it so desired. Mayor
Hoffman commented that he did not think any one was interested in the reimbursement issue.
Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the potential reimbursement went up to the
$800,000 and also included the money expended for the urban renewal planning work.
Mr. Powell discussed the amendment to Resolution 10-34. He indicated that the new Section 4
stated that repayment of this debt was subordinate to other LORA debts, which allowed the
Redevelopment Agency to continue its financing activities in the interim. He emphasized that the
expenditures for reimbursement had to go for either an urban renewal plan development or
projects under that plan.
Mr. Williams confirmed to Councilor Tierney that the City would be letting contracts for
consultants to work on the urban renewal plan in conjunction with the PDA. He gave a ballpark
estimate of a $100,000 to $150,000 range.
Mayor Hoffman cited the lateness of the hour in stating that he would entertain a motion to reduce
the allotted speaking time from five minutes to three minutes. There was no motion.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Hoffman opened the hearing to public testimony.
• Janine Dunphy, 15450 SW Boones Ferry Road
She referenced the Oregonian article published last Wednesday (June 9) entitled "Portland Leaves
Empty Development Instead Of Affordable Housing in South Waterfront." She questioned whether
it was wise for the City to sign a PDA with the same developer involved in that project. She noted
that the South Waterfront project was similar to the proposal for Lake Oswego with a combination
of millions of dollars of public money and private money. She mentioned that the developers fell
behind schedule and borrowed significant amounts from the City in addition to a $1.7 million
development fee, yet the City of Portland still did not have the promised housing mix.
She noted that the PDA tonight had a $1.3 million budget, including a $520,000 fee to
Williams/Dame & White to manage the other consultants hired. She mentioned that she did not
support moving ahead with the Foothills project at this time. She asked if it was wise to use this
firm. She asked why the contract did not go out to bid, noting that Portland also did not go out to
bid on its contract. She asked why the City's Economic Development Department could not
manage the other consultants, so that the City did not have to pay this significant amount of money
to anyone.
She observed that an integral part of the agreement was a commitment from the City for a
streetcar, as well as having the streetcar financing in place. She pointed out that the citizens and
the Council have not yet made a decision on the streetcar, as the Task Force has yet to make its
recommendation.
She mentioned watching the April 13 Council study session with Bruce Woods, the development
expert, who said that this type of development was not feasible now or in the near future. She
asked that the City not sign this agreement at this time, especially with this developer, until they
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 20 of 28
knew more. She mentioned her concern that Williams/Dame & White was also an investor in the
Foothills LLC. She questioned the ethics of that situation.
Jerry Wheeler, Chamber CEO, 13594 Blazer Trail
He thanked the Council for its hard work during the budget process. He urged the Council to
support the PDA. He argued that the reality was that now was the time to prepare for the future
and to engage in a process that would provide the due diligence to establish whether Foothills was
the development opportunity that many believed it to be.
He held that they had a small window of opportunity to accomplish a great deal in a shorter time
period than before. He cited property owners and businesses willing to take a leap of faith and a
Council that believed that a community that did not grow could not sustain its quality of life and
services. He mentioned that the property owners tied up their properties in creating the LLC, which
meant that they had a far greater investment in the area than implied by the small amount of cash
up front under discussion. He stated that, in today's market, only public/private partnership
projects would succeed,
He listed the benefits of moving forward with this agreement: a broader economic tax base,
potential housing for families and those wishing to age in place, and a new transportation link from
downtown Portland to downtown Lake Oswego via the river and via rail. He argued that these
benefits far outweighed the risk of moving forward with the agreement. He referenced the opt out
opportunities in the PDA that protected taxpayer investment down the road. He agreed that
ultimately the taxpayers would decide much of the future for Foothills.
He contended economic development attracting new families, new jobs, and new tax revenues
was the only way to solve tight dollars and rising costs. He encouraged the Council to commit to
economic development, citing the powerful impact developing this amazing resource could have on
Lake Oswego's quality of life.
• Mike Erickson, Stampher Road Neighborhood Association, 255 Stampher Road, Lake
Oswego
He commented that, while he personally thought the Foothills development could be a good thing,
the neighborhood had mixed feelings about it. He mentioned that there were many projects going
on right now on Tryon Creek, including a $300,000 to $400,000 salmon restoration project. He
reported that the fish biologists have told the neighborhood association that an extension of the
Portland to Lake Oswego streetcar required moving the tracks over 50 feet to run through the
Jarvis property and building a trestle bridge right over the salmon restoration project. He described
the trolleys rattling the soil and disturbing the salmon runs as environmental issues not addressed
yet that could block the streetcar.
He indicated that the neighbors agreed that there has not been much communication yet between
the neighbors and the trolley project. He recalled the vote passed just as he was moving into the
neighborhood to purchase the Jarvis property with dedicated park bond dollars. He argued that
the trolley tracks running through the Jarvis property removed the property's status as a dedicated
park. He emphasized that there were several issues that needed addressing regarding the
streetcar impacts.
He commented that he thought spending $50 million per mile for a six -mile trolley run ($250 to
$300 million project) was a waste of money. He recalled that the Council members had spoken of
being fiscally conservative in their voter pamphlet statements. He argued that $250 to $300 million
was not fiscally conservative. He contended that any money coming from the federal government
would only add to the federal deficit. He questioned whether sending a trolley into the Foothills
area as a key development element was worth all the fiscal issues involved.
He stated his opinion that, if the City could make Foothills work without the trolley, many people
would support the project. He pointed out that the buses ran only half full during peak traffic hours
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 21 of 28
June 15, 2010
now. He doubted that more Lake Oswego residents would give up their cars to take a trolley into
Portland. He encouraged the Council to be fiscally conservative and to make the right decision not
to waste taxpayer dollars on the trolley in these tough times.
Diana Boom, PO Box 328, Lake Oswego
She commented that she opposed this agreement for the reasons previously stated but she
expected that the Council would pass it. She asked whether access to Hwy 43 was now an
essential condition of development. She asked whether contamination would also be included.
She asked if all parties had to agree for the City to opt out. She asked if there were penalties,
should the City opt out on its own.
Gary Buford, 5 Camelot Court and 415 N State Street
He mentioned that he was a civil engineer and surveyor by profession, a registered professional in
Oregon who has done a lot of residential development work in the Lake Oswego area during the
past 39 plus years. He indicated his familiarity with the City's planning process.
He spoke of his amazement in learning that the City was providing $800,000 for pre -development
planning for this project, something he has never seen the City do for any of his projects. He
indicated that he understood that the City and the landowners needed to have questions
answered.
He commented that, as a civil engineer, he was very concerned when any part of a development
was within a flood plain, as a considerable portion of this project was. He indicated that the
concept of cut and fill allowing development on a flood plain did not make this project any more
palatable to him.
He discussed his concern about the Tryon Creek sewage treatment plant. He said that he knew of
no current plans by the City of Portland to relocate or abandon that sewage plant. He mentioned
that he had experience with sewage treatment plants, and wondered whether the Council had
truthful knowledge about the cost and ramifications of moving or relocating a sewage treatment
plant. He questioned the Council spending $800,000 without a full knowledge of what it was
attempting to accomplish.
He indicated that he had many more concerns about the project. He suggested that the Foothills
property owners should develop their property and solve the development problems on their own,
just as he has done for 40 years. He argued that the City should do what it needed to do and the
property owners do what they needed to do, as has been the situation in development for many
years.
He stated that he did not object to development in the Foothills District but he thought that the
property owners should finance it themselves. He reiterated that he did not think that the Council
members understood the full ramifications of this project. He mentioned his understanding that the
streetcar was necessary for Foothills and that Foothills was necessary for the streetcar. He asked
whether that was the reason that the Council was moving forward on this.
Charles "Skip" Ormsby, 170 SW Birdshill Road, Portland, Clackamas County
He spoke in opposition to the contract. He noted that this was transit -oriented development, yet
last Monday, he had probably been the only transit rider attending the Council meeting. He
described transit in Lake Oswego as `pathetic,' which the streetcar would only make worse
because it required transfers. He reiterated that transfers would kill the project because people did
not like transfers and the time they took. He cited his personal experience in stating that transfers
added on about seven minutes to a Lake Oswego to Portland trip. He encouraged the Council
members to simulate the transfers as part of evaluating this contract agreement.
He suggested that the Council send a postcard to its citizens informing them that it would be
encumbering them to several hundred thousand dollars a year to refinance the West End Building
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 22 of 28
June 15, 2010
and the timing relative to the Foothills PDA and the selection of the locally preferred alternatives.
He speculated that the Council would face serious problems with its voters in November if it did not
do so.
Leonard Bergstein, 2226 SW Main Street, Portland
He indicated that he represented a growing group of individuals in neighborhoods who were
interested in making the best decision for the locally preferred alternative in the transit corridor
between Portland and Lake Oswego. He said that his clients had a hard time understanding how
the Council could vote on this PDA to align the City's interests with the streetcar six months before
the Council selected the locally preferred alternative. He cited paragraph F in the PDA as
irrevocably and straightforwardly tying the projects together.
He presented his clients' request that the Council delay action on this PDA until the Council could
make a clear legal determination that this decision would not prejudice its subsequent decision on
the locally preferred alternative in December 2010.
Jonathan Snell, 3250 Upper Drive
He addressed the issue of greenfrastructure. He described a wooded wetland in the southeast
corner of Foothills Park adjacent to Roehr Park and the river as representative of the City's
unrealized opportunities to manage the community's natural areas in an effective manner. He
indicated that the City funded some good work in that wetland, including removal of ivy on the
trees. However, their follow up to the ivy removal found one tree that still had ivy growing on it. He
cited this as an example of the continuity of care needed as the City went through the process of
finding a cost-effective and efficient way to manage its natural areas.
He commented that the work involved would not take as long as one might think, citing his own
experience in discovering that what he thought would be an all day job of removing blackberries
only took a couple of hours. He spoke of the power of appropriate herbicides and recognizing the
plant succession process. He held that, if they took an intentional approach to natural area
management, then they would find it a community and good will building effort.
Carolyne Jones, 2818 S Poplar Way
She stated her opposition to the contract. She quoted from the Oregonian June 10 article, "Empty
Lots and Empty Promises," noting that most of the $13 million spent by the Portland Development
Commission to buy South Waterfront land for affordable housing among other things went to the
lead developers and yet the affordable apartments have not been built.
She expressed her concern that this project was being structured as a windfall for the LLC
partners. She mentioned that her research this afternoon found that the expected down payment
for new residential developments was 20%. She indicated that she could not find out similar
information on commercial development. She said that Mr. Williams had not known the answer
either. She asked the Council to delay the project until the City could find out what the down
payment was on commercial development and compare it to what the LLC owners have put up.
Mayor Hoffman closed the hearing to public testimony.
STAFF FOLLOW-UP
Mr. Williams addressed the recent Oregonian article about the South Waterfront affordable
housing. He reported that staff talked with the Portland Development Commission Director on the
South Waterfront project and learned that North Macadam Investors (Williams & Dame) fulfilled all
their required obligations in the development agreement, except for 30 units of affordable housing.
He indicated that the affordable housing component was still in progress as the developers were
still working on the first phase of the development (1,000 condominium units).
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 23 of 28
He mentioned that the Portland Development director felt good about the work done to date. The
director was very impressed with Williams & Dame, and considered them one of the only
developers in the region capable of accomplishing the work done at the South Waterfront to date.
He commented that a careful reading of the article found that it was really about the City of
Portland's ability to accomplish some of the requirements for providing affordable housing for
South Waterfront. He noted that the complexities of the entire development and current market
conditions have made it difficult for Portland to get affordable housing in place, although the first
affordable housing project was scheduled to start construction in November 2010.
He said that he felt comfortable with the information that he received back from the various people
he spoke to who were involved with the South Waterfront project.
Mr. Dame stated that his philosophy with respect to newspapers was to respond only to written
questions and only in writing, as he did in this particular case. He pointed out that this article was
about the Portland Development Commission, and not about Williams/Dame & White. He
indicated that neither the Portland Development Commission nor the Portland Housing Bureau
made any adjustments or corrections to his answers to the newspaper's questions. He confirmed
that Williams & Dame, as the representative of North Macadam Investors, fulfilled all of its
obligations for affordable housing, which were to make land available to Portland to construct said
housing.
He mentioned the background of the economic downturn that delayed the affordable housing
project to this November. He recalled that they sold the tax credits for an affordable housing
project four years ago for $1.03, which was at a premium. Today, with no one needing tax credits
because no one was making money, they would sell them for 74 cents.
He commented that the new Portland Housing Bureau, as reconstructed under Councilor Fish, has
done an amazing job in pulling this affordable housing project together and getting it financed. He
mentioned that he has worked on the design of this project for four years, essentially for nothing,
as the loan all went to the architectural work and permit fees. He stated that he would give his
personal and direct phone number to anyone wanting to discuss the facts of the situation with him,
and not the stuff in the newspaper.
Mr. Williams answered Ms. Boom's question about termination clauses. He said that the City
could opt out of the agreement at any time without penalties. He clarified that if the City opted out,
it would forego the reimbursement of the $130,000 by the industrial property owners. He explained
that these property owners have invested a lot of money to date in work that the City asked them to
do in the past. They had wanted assurances that this process would move forward to a product
with which they could work.
He discussed his expectation that they would not get to a point where they spent more than the
$800,000, as they would know before then whether the City should opt out or not. He emphasized
that he felt comfortable that, with the Oversight Committee in place, they would have good
communication and understanding of where they were with the agreement as it moved forward.
He commented that, although the City could opt out at any time, the goal was to complete the
agreement and have development actually occur.
He addressed Mr. Buford's comment about the treatment plant. He indicated that this plant owned
by the City of Portland provided services for all of Lake Oswego. In addition, 40% of its treatment
capacity served wastewater coming from Portland. He reported that the BES Director, Dean
Marriott, was very interested in Lake Oswego's work and willing to look at options for moving
forward. He said that Mr. Marriott's primary concern was protecting the Portland ratepayers,
similar to Lake Oswego's concern about protecting the Lake Oswego ratepayers.
He mentioned that the treatment plant was 50 years old and had a number of significant issues
that needed addressing. He said that staff would like to develop something that made the
investment needed in the treatment plant work in the best possible fashion for any future Foothills
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 24 of 28
June 15, 2010
development. He indicated that this project included looking at the right solution for the treatment
plant in a way that maximized the dollars that needed to go into the plant over time.
He addressed the issues raise regarding the streetcar alignment and environmental concerns with
Tryon Creek and the Jarvis property. He mentioned that Tri -Met has dealt with these kinds of
environmental issues in the many projects that it has done. He assured Mr. Erickson and the
Council that this project would look thoroughly at those issues and minimize to the extent possible
any impacts to the Tryon Cove Park, as well as deal with any associated environmental issues.
He mentioned that the two options under consideration for the streetcar alignment in the Stampher
Road area required a bridge over Tryon Creek. He said that the bridge design would protect the
fish passage and not impact the work of BES in Tryon Cove at this time.
COUNCIL QUESTIONS
Councilor Moncrieff referenced Ms. Boom's other questions regarding access to Hwy 43 and soil
contamination. Mr. Williams reiterated that if the study found that there were insurmountable
issues, including Hwy 43 access, that made the project financially unfeasible, the parties could
agree to terminate the agreement. He said that he did not believe that the soil contamination
question was specifically called out, but an overarching essential condition for the agreement was
that the entire development had to be financially feasible. Any one particular thing that was not
financially feasible, even if it was not spelled out as an essential condition, could lead to the parties
agreeing to terminate the agreement.
Mr. Williams confirmed that the City could pull out of the contract without cause and without the
agreement of the other parties, although it would lose the $130,000 reimbursement. Mr. Powell
commented that the trigger for the $130,000 payment was the adoption of the Framework Plan; it
did not accrue before that. He pointed out that it was unlikely that Lake Oswego would exercise its
unilateral termination opportunity after adopting the Framework Plan because the Plan set the
stage for the development agreement and the post -plan amendments.
Councilor Moncrieff asked why the City was not delaying this agreement until after the locally
preferred alternative decision has been made. Mr. Williams explained that the primary reason
was staff's expectation that this process would help inform the streetcar decision, the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) decision, and the locally preferred alternative (LPA)
decision. He observed that the Foothills effort was six months behind in providing the information
that the transit project needed from the Foothills area.
Mr. Williams mentioned staff's belief that development needed to fund the streetcar project. He
said that he would not recommend any financing strategy for the streetcar that looked at increasing
taxes to citizens. He explained that having a better understanding of the potential development
opportunities through this Foothills PDA process would help inform both the staff work in identifying
potential financing strategies for the streetcar and the Council decisions.
Mr. Brown indicated that the two primary streetcar alignment options under consideration for
Foothills presupposed a street pattern that they were not yet certain worked for the development
and vice versa. He held that understanding how the streetcar would relate to and interact with a
street pattern for future development was part of the consideration of the LPA. He concurred with
Mr. Williams that the Foothills project was behind the streetcar project in terms of providing the
information that the streetcar team was looking for.
Councilor Olson asked for clarification on the statement in Section 5.2.6 (Exhibit C), which talked
about an anticipated supplemental DEIS as a result of the Framework Plan. Mr. Brown explained
that his thought behind including that provision was accommodating a hypothetical change to the
alignment. He posed a scenario in which they decided that it made more sense to shift the
streetcar alignment away from the alignment studied under the DEIS, and the FTA required a
supplement DEIS to incorporate the change. He said that it was unclear right now whether they
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 15, 2010
Page 25 of 28
would deviate that far from the current alignments to make that necessary, but he felt it was worth
flagging.
Councilor Olson asked how funding the streetcar with development money would work in light of
the information provided to the Council that development money would not exist for the next five to
ten years. Mr. Williams mentioned that they did have an existing urban renewal district that could
provide tax increment funds for the project. He pointed out that they could not forecast when the
Foothills development would actually occur with respect to when the streetcar project would occur.
He explained that this project would look at how those two lined up and how potential development
fees and tax increment financing could be used and timed with the project itself. He commented
that the City could only deal with the cash flow challenges once they knew what the costs were,
what the City's responsibility would be, and what options they were dealing with.
Mr. Brown mentioned that the PDA included a commitment to work with the City on the creation
and formation of a local improvement district (LID). He described that as another way to get the
private property owners benefiting from the streetcar to help pay for the construction of the line.
He indicated that all phases of the Portland Streetcar have included an LID component, which
passed with overwhelming support from the owners along the LID sections. Mayor Hoffman
commented that there were LIDs on the Central Eastside and under discussion in the John's
Landing area.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
Councilor Hennagin moved the adoption of Resolution 10-33 and Resolution 10-34, and
authorizing the Mayor to sign a pre -development agreement for the Foothills area.
Councilor Jordan seconded the motion.
Councilor Olson stated that she would vote against the agreement, citing the objections she
stated during the budget discussion with respect to the City budget and the City reserve funds.
She agreed with the point raised by citizens tonight that they had no idea how much money they
might need to take out of reserves for the West End building, should the refinancing of the building
fail.
She mentioned that the agreement directly tied the streetcar to the Foothills project. She observed
that the costs to the Lake Oswego citizens and the City to fund construction of the streetcar were
another unknown, as were the ongoing maintenance and operations commitments for the
streetcar. She commented that they did not know who would operate the streetcar or how the City
would pay for it. She noted that the Council has also not discussed whether the community
wanted a second or even a third urban renewal district in town. She argued that the Council's
priorities, given the current economy, did not support spending the money at this time.
She commented that, while the Foothills redevelopment was probably a good thing, for her the
issue was timing. She recalled the presentation by Bruce Wood who said that nothing could
happen in Foothills without large public subsidies. She said that she could not commit their
citizens to large public subsidies right now. She mentioned that she had concerns about the
environmental issues raised tonight.
Mayor Hoffman said that he would support the motion. He described this as a defining moment
for this City Council, in that it was setting the future for the next 20 to 50 years in the only area that
would provide a future for Lake Oswego in housing choices, supporting the downtown, and
providing a stable funding mechanism for the years 2040 to 2080. He argued that they were
leaving the city in better shape than they found it. He stated that he was comfortable that the City
was using these funds in a transparent manner.
He emphasized that the important action was the Council looking to redevelop a property that
would add to the downtown and to the quality of life in Lake Oswego. He cited his earlier
statement that a city could either grow or decline, and that it was better to manage growth than a
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 26 of 28
June 15, 2010
declining city. He cited the stories he heard from mayors this weekend who did have declining
cities to manage.
Councilor Hennagin said that he would vote for the motion because one of his campaign planks
had been the redevelopment of the Foothills area. He held that this redevelopment was necessary
to create more housing options for those who wanted to age in place as they downsized their
homes.
A roll call vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' Councilor Olson voted `no.' [6-1]
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER
8.1 Ordinance 2549, an ordinance of the City of Lake Oswego amending LOC Article
50.44 (Flood Management Area) regarding applicability, map amendments, and the
flood management area for a portion of Springbrook Creek, and adopting findings LU
10-0003-1731
Mayor Hoffman mentioned the Council's previous discussion of these ordinances. He said that he
did not recall anyone opposing them.
Councilor Jordan moved the enactment of Ordinance 2549. Councilor Johnson seconded
the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman,
Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
8.2 Ordinance 2552, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending LOC
Chapter 50 (Community Development Code), Section 50.11.010 to limit the square
footage of delicatessens, bakeries, and restaurants in the Campus Research and
Development (CR&D) zone, and adopting findings LU 09-0034-1732
Councilor Jordan moved the enactment of Ordinance 2552. Councilor Johnson seconded
the motion. A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman,
Councilors Johnson, Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
8.3 Ordinance 2456, an ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council amending Chapter 50
of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code to add new Article 50.08B
relating to the Glenmorrie R - 15 Overlay District and adopting findings LU 09-0043-
1733
Councilor Jordan moved the enactment of Ordinance 2456. Councilor Johnson seconded
the motion.
Councilor Olson commented that, while she voted against this originally, she has heard some
good arguments from the neighborhood that convinced her to vote in favor of it this time.
A voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Johnson,
Hennagin, Olson, Moncrieff, Tierney, and Jordan voting `aye.' [7-0]
9. INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCIL
9.1 Councilor Information
9.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental
Committees
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
10.1 City Manager
10.1.1 Review of Council Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 27 of 28
June 15, 2010
10.2 City Attorney
11. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robyn C ristie
City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON October 5. 2010
Jack D. Hoffman, Mayor
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 28 of 28
June 15, 2010
0 SjiO Gwuh ,
i -A ra h Ns
Streetcar: Tying Together Recent Cullerton, Chase, & Obletz Presentations
October 7, 2010 R A Fontes rfontes@q.com
Table 1: As Lake Oswego goes, so goes West Linn
Among metro area cities with over 20,000 residents, Lake Oswego and West Linn rank 1st & 2nd in per capita
income, average horse value, and average age. From the Census Bureau's American Community Survey:
Chart 1: Transit Use Patterns:
A slide presented to the CAC (but not to Council) by Metro shows reasons people use transit:
ZF
32%
12%
Recreation, Shopping Personalbus
■ Ali trips
32a�
21%
Work
❑ Most often
6%
I
Visiting
17%
SS:
4a
Medical schoo'
According to TriMet, about 11 % of all trips are during the evening peak hour, and 31 % during the two peak
evening and two peak morning hours. So about seven out of ten rides occur during non -commute hours. As
LO & WL populations age, corridor commute hour trips should decrease further relative to other trips.
Table 2: While traffic on other roads has been increasing, highway 43 counts have been going down
ODOT's website shows state highway data for 1993 through 2009. Some examples:
Lake Oswego
West Linn
Per capita income (in 2008 inflation-adjusted dollars:
$48,313
$45,889
Owner occupied 'homes - Medan value (do'lars)
$540,000
$452,000
Median Age
42.1
41.5
{Median Age - 2000 Census
41.2
38.11
Population
38,835
24,378
{Population - 2000 Census
35,278
22,2611
Chart 1: Transit Use Patterns:
A slide presented to the CAC (but not to Council) by Metro shows reasons people use transit:
ZF
32%
12%
Recreation, Shopping Personalbus
■ Ali trips
32a�
21%
Work
❑ Most often
6%
I
Visiting
17%
SS:
4a
Medical schoo'
According to TriMet, about 11 % of all trips are during the evening peak hour, and 31 % during the two peak
evening and two peak morning hours. So about seven out of ten rides occur during non -commute hours. As
LO & WL populations age, corridor commute hour trips should decrease further relative to other trips.
Table 2: While traffic on other roads has been increasing, highway 43 counts have been going down
ODOT's website shows state highway data for 1993 through 2009. Some examples:
1993
2009
43,.01(1993)/.02(2009) mile south of Julia
28,000
24,800
43, .05 mile south of Terwilliger
28,000
24,400
1-5-30 mile south of Haines
92,000
107,300
99W, .05 mile south of Multnomah Blvd
22,000
23,500
(note: counts show inconsistency and some stations showed
gains on 43, including an apparent nw4lier north of Taylors Ferry.)
CD
V'
co
•ct
N
O
v
co
CD
co
co
(o
co
cn
c7
c
M
c
co
Co CD
J
T Q
co F=
O
co
CSS
N
co
N
N
CO
N
LO
N
N
co
N
j N
N
cO o cO O LO o
N N T T
sdpi Aup�a M jo jegwnN
cO
LL
m I
m
OD
r
CCf
LL
Com'
p
y
>, 0
F-:
ami o c)O
,r Ei
C
t ��
°'0 O CD C)
O
ca
U
z >'
.�
C
E� QCTO-0
N
ca
F` U 7+ Q
ca m -�
r
3
F- O
C
0 c ori o
co
0 0 �-C
o
N O m
QO- s(j —
x E
�' E �' v
_c .- as
o m p>
O v +�
-0 0 0
'O
C w F- L)
0
L D vj c
E c c
cu c h E
- C� 0 -�
m m m
6 C 0 0 0
N �L (no
o v -SCO
O _
m O O c c_ .c
i
70 (4 > N
L r+ C(S
a�O
E o -
7 V O G)
U O�
0+ >.
Cfl 0 0 0 0
c4 to ca 0
�..
c U U
C� �- O
0 E
CO ar
7 c c y m
ci
L
C
fl C
Y
C= LO � m U)
'C Co tTf � Cn =
UC C as M�
i Q% cu
0). _C
>, ,D 70
N
'LS C C> L C
C Q
(n 0-0 (D 3
O cn w O>, ca
E p ` +`
-C co N
o N
mo c- O
O v_ t`n
rn O
-=
0 Q E
05 O E~
c p m E
3 -
c E
0 cn o_ _
o �� ca x
M 0
v 0 E o
p
m _ O -0 Q
a) cn C
o cn
�:� N M C=
� m ~ � 7
C
0 Z '0
C - C2 O
� .-
Q �O(om3ca
C
ca (n
_C_
:
CO cO� �Y
-0
fn 'CS r 0
c: 0
0L O O C
O
c
`� o E o
m
D
= a> m e
-0
CU 60 0
>. .c 0
omi m
O ca C j p� C>
�1� co
0 E r
n 3 c6 c
a
m Q o c a of
CO X'
to
C
_
CU N E to
C: 06 m
c m 3 Z
0 J) t
O ff~ «
a O C 0 U
C6 O
> E
c vi
5
0 o E ami -0 CD
0 C_ `O
N -O 0 0
T >, 'o Ch >, "
o� o m c� C o
c E c n
c0 0
OL
c 0 c co M cn
O 70 0 -o L
mai
E
ca Q m
Cora-0� E 3 x o
Q.OL"O
0 CSN [4~
m m w -
in ori coo
tU
U) U 0�
N
O-0 O
Cl)"0 c -O'D N ori
0 F- Qy O
j C c s
p
ca E 6 cpa
.S
c_j 0
r
L O O
+- -0 -r-:
0
mcQoUE�
0 0 +.
5, 'o E
Ho p �
'/� 'D m c 0 a N
O
m
OLAO N a_ T
c'o
0 W O ,
O N
L
® -6 0 m O T O
Y a
(�
to RS
i
r c4 -a as
m' 3
�O -O !-
0
C
c 0
C Q R
0 0 c �
,�E 0 i
U
[n C L
N O
3
� o o � v
O
+ CL
M
U) QCU >
p o or c c t
0) 0
O _
E0L
p m m
0
> _
E rr or yin Q o 0
E c S
V E
0 in U
0� N C 3
- m cn c
N .0 Y C "- .0 o
+
-O CII C4
,s 0 -0
U Q3 i
.O.
�r< w Ca O p�
C1�L
.0.
= QSO� 31 N
CU O
CU
0 •�
N 0 O
E
-a -p-.n
En
«
+N•
C c'c0Epo
OO—ori
O LLL
p
co Qi 0)
co
m
m r r 3 c
m�opo
0 cOA m m
(n O m
O 0 U)
E
0
.0 C
to �
Y -O
co D.. "
=5
L O y p w
(D
0
V CO 0
0 N O •C C
m co 0 2 m v
CU j
>,._
0 O- O-
c
0) 0_
L p NCA m
5
m 0 O C
co
� 0
v� D E c o
c
E tOn 3 0
�� 0
a> D c
�—
o H p cn a
0 O ca
C O .� c" -o
Z r c6 N C9
U 0 O_ 0 Cti
T_ RS Z E D
CL
4.1
O
U
C
ca
m
L
U1
0
L
F -
i
O
CV
U
co
C
O
0
w
le
to
i
to
I-
CD
N
E
O
CO
C7
06
CY)
N
O
M
Ca
L
U
i LO
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
O
LO
O
O
N
000000000
000000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
to M I- OU*) Ct M N r
sapiEj ALpM@@M
L L
�
� M
_
v ao
O° L
CD
C CL
�U).-
�},3
p OQ 0 Co
O
m°
Y
�O + C
Co
CL co
mo
Q°
°-O
C-0 UJ -E _0
to
Y -p
O O
I1�
Q. C 0
M U
to .-L O
C O
C
U N
cis -CO
C F -L
t O
L N «0
U Y E Cts
C
v C co
U
O
a) Cts CMO tit
L O
C
Q
'p > to
_
O
0 M
L c6
m
to�
'C O O
m
O- O L
C)
0)
e) rn E
t c o.-
tri ':
c
°— U) -0
��
tn
C
a) _c m
>
o co
U L
- (D C
v O o) c4
> C
co
,-
U O
O N p �-
a) 3
U) Q)
° to o0 >
0
ca
0-
Co
-p
Q°Eo
CL
r-0
U'
ca
o
0 0
C5 -T -0E
p
O p to
N> -0
E
O U O
+, .�
«! Cl O.6
U
rn
in
--0 O
CL OL
�— U)
a c
C O
>
m C
m - VJ 0
70
<fl
a) O
Y
O
`� t4 cII
p
Ccz O c
p
Q U
.�
U U
N
(n cz
Q+ m O
to
� N
ca
Y c0
r
ocn
oC. 2)L
`o-°
CD- ° E
C
tp cu
E
N p 0 CD
co
OD CU
ti
N"0
C O .v
L OL
U) 5c F-
U
++ L
Off
O U
N 0t
COO0
.
N
t
O U)
QCO
O
�'
O a
m
^
1.L
V
� MO
O t(S VL...
U � 'COC
.Q
Y
°
(1g to
>' • V cu
/a--�
W
cN
E -Cc
16 0
=
C omC
O�
� C
U) cu
�
U
m
_ c13
O
'S
to r c4 Cu
+o
LO
N� CL
p�
�QQr
to
�,p C
4-
E
O 0)
0 o
N —
N
a� o
O
aL C
o w
cts-C m -
Cll 0
N
- 3
�' L c) O
RS
�
co
-C
�
v
�
0 � �
N m O
O
� � CUll
N C
E
c y
O _- � C
ca
t2
O p E p
OCA
m
t) -o
v U
c E° a
N
U o)
-
0
•� >
C c N
s°
Q 'V
N cis O Z3
U L U
p
NEm
CZ -0
a.a?
a>i �'c C v
O�(0
O CU 0 a)
= 0 m
tv�
a rn*E -r
°°
T -� w m
i
U (�
a w "cc
C) 7 Q� a)
N a
-a,
Y Q O
tt 3:
Y?
UD Zi U-0'=
r 3 ro
p
cpm to
b >, O p
v O
V
w 3
CU C
O
O a) c
N C
O U Y
c
0
-CZcu
CO y
tD
tv p E
r Y
U) o
cc
coca
C: a)
O-0
0)
iT i+
-a N Q
Cll
C� LO _Q
Go co
.Q a)
A L C>
U)
V
cis O
It
O
[�
Q r �- -p
r v
«. tll CU
L to Y L
me
C
O
0.
O a
ct
w c6
E UL�U
0 U) CDmLy
M - U
R - m
(D
to .o c
v
-0
a:
a
0
'O c6
aD ti tl) m
� oL)
5
c13 m
E
L E}
CD
�`��
� c
03�
�
to y- -
c Qom
�`
" c
E O
c0
d
p
co V)
vo,.w
E C O O
cc Q
Ea c�'�L
E
0 `
Z-
Z'
_CU
C) Ir N
C:
m o a�
-C
NM
O_0
N
JL
Cl)
�- co
Portland
Beaverton
Mil
Tigard Lake Oswego
W
King City`
Sherwood
V
METRO
6
t
Tualatin Durham
i
t
i
t!1'J
1
Wilsonville
Canby
r'
City boundaries
j Study Corridor
__- Highways
Major Roads
i
West " n 1
Gladstone
J
w
regob'Wn City
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 I
Miles
Nommbw Zoo
Maria Meneghin
1179 Sunningdale Road
�`u� Cn��►t
Nx1A ja,C'7ene?h; )
Last Tuesday, the City Council heard the WEB Site Study Work Group present various
options for their consideration. It was obvious to me that the Work Group put a lot of
effort and thought into the problem. Now it is time for the City Council to make the
difficult decision about which option to support before they bring it to the public for a
vote. Back in July, the problem as defined for the Work Group was to find a way to take
the WEB off the interest -only General Fund payments and find a resolution to this
financial conundrum. They were encouraged to look at the City's already identified and
prioritized facilities needs when there were crafting their position. They've done a
thoughtful job of answering that Charge, and I appreciate it.
As the City Council moves forward in finalizing a decision, I would like to encourage
you to show the community that you can solve this problem by choosing the option that
most closely fulfills your obligations and has the best chance of passing a GO Bond. I
fear that if the City Council over -reaches in these economically problematic times, the
WEB resolution will not have the full community's support and we will continue to be
faced with this divisive financial issue as we try to go forward with other plans. You
need to judge this project in context with the Council's other stated Goals, like the need
for a new maintenance facility, the implementation of the Lake Grove Village Plan, and
the need for an improved library. I encourage you to weigh the community's continuing
financial goodwill in achieving those Goals.
I strongly support Option 4, which addresses the WEB financial concerns and
incorporates the most pressing facilities needs. Option 4 doesn't muddy the GO Bond
issue by introducing recreational desires that have not yet undergone careful study to
assess their financial impact on capital obligations and ongoing maintenance and staffing
costs. Pools and an indoor/outdoor skate park should be studied and weighed along side
all the other proposed recreational amenities before being added to the City's financial
obligations. I encourage you to keep your priorities clear and your message to the
community regarding those priorities consistent.
Please don't let the long-term possibilities of this site distract you from doing what is
necessary to solve the underlying WEB financial issue.
J
October 5, 2010
Dear Lake Oswego City Council Members:
I am writing to inform you of the concerns of the neighbors surrounding the proposed
Waluga Reservoir #2 site. I am a member of the board of the Lake Forest Neighborhood
Association, but I am here representing my personal views and those of my immediate
neighbors. Parkhill is a quiet, dead-end street full of young children who play on the
street and comfortably run from yard to yard. We are extremely upset about the plan to
construct a second reservoir abutting our neighborhood.
Between June and September, the neighbors of the Waluga Reservoir have had three
well -attended meetings with the staff of the Lake Oswego -Tigard Water Partnership,
including Joel Komarek, Jane Heisler, Matt Maring and others. While Jane was
responsive and, I believe, sincere in her efforts to facilitate communication, these
meetings did not result in neighbors feeling heard, nor in getting adequate answers to
many of our questions. Having recently been informed that City Council is unaware
that neighbors are upset makes me feel that these meetings were insincere and causes
me to wonder what the point was of the time we spent at them.
My aim in writing this letter and personally opening communication with City Council is
that we might enter a more productive discussion that will result in meaningful action.
When I gave a statement expressing these concerns at the Water Partnership Oversight
Committee meeting on June 28, 2010, Councilor Bill Tierney reassured me at the end
of the meeting by saying, "don't worry, we'll take care of you." This has been a learning
process for me, and I am still learning the system and the roles of various people,
including City Council. It is my hope that, I am now in the right place, that, as elected
officials, you will echo our voices, push these questions and issues as if it were your
own property, life, family, and future, to ensure that the right decisions are reached
and that every effort is made to minimize negative impact on the citizens of Lake
Oswego, including excessive burden shouldered by a few.
Our concerns and questions we hope the City Council will carefully consider are as
follows.
1. Visual impact: The primary concern of neighbors is the visual impact of the
proposed 40' high, 120' diameter monolith in a residential setting. Despite the
fact that the location is a wooded area, even if no trees were removed, it is still
quite sparse for more than half of the year. This structure will have an enormous
visual impact on our neighborhood. We will be looking at the reservoir as we
pull up the street and into our driveways, as we look out our kitchen windows,
sit on our decks/porches, and as we play with our kids in our backyards. We
page 1 of 5 Waterbury letter to Council regarding proposed Waluga Reservoir #2
would like City Council to push the planners and designers of this proposed
structure on the following issues.
a. Capacity: The proposed 3.5 million gallon capacity is one key factor
driving the size. We have been informed that this capacity was
determined based on equalizing, emergency, and fire flow storage. We
were later informed verbally that 1.5 or 2 million gallons (varying
information was given at different times) is for projected growth in Lake
Oswego (and Tigard?). As City Council considers this reservoir, please
give very serious consideration to whether or not the capacity is
appropriate. How was this growth projected? Over what period is it
expected to occur? How accurate are these projections? Do we want to
pay now, in this financial climate, for growth that may or may not ever
come to fruition? Is capacity an area where there is room to lessen the
burden on this location and these surrounding residents by opting for a
lower capacity, a smaller reservoir that will still meet the City's and
Partnership's needs well into the future?
b. Location alternatives: What alternative locations were considered prior to
purchasing the proposed location? What locations can be considered now
that would have less of an impact on residents of Lake Oswego? What if
this location were not available.... what locations might be considered? It
is not too late to seriously consider this. The quarry was proposed by
neighbors as a possibility that would be further removed from residents.
We understand that this option would present some hurdles but are
unconvinced that these are insurmountable, and would like Council to
further investigate this alternative. The matter of replacing existing park
land, as would be required, seems relatively easy to address by
designating the land obtained for the proposed location as park land.
c. Height: The bottom line is that a 40' high structure is completely
inappropriate to a residential setting. That is why the City themselves
have rules and regulations in place to prevent development of structures
any higher than 35 feet in this type of setting. Barring a relocation of the
proposed reservoir, reducing capacity and height without creeping closer
to the properties would be viewed as a favorable step by neighbors. We
were told at our first meeting in dune 2010 by Mr. Komarek that the water
pressure issue in the Waluga neighborhood would be adequately
addressed with a 35 foot height. There is a definite feeling that we are
shouldering the burden so that the Waluga residents' water pressure
issue may be improved. We are interested in definitive information on
how many homes are affected by the water pressure issue, what the
boundaries are of this issue (roughly), and what the degrees of
improvement may be as relates to the reservoir height (e.g., does it
page 2 of 5 Waterbury letter to Council regarding proposed Waluga Reservoir #2
N
improve be a certain percentage for every 5 feet of height?). The issue of
height vs. diameter is one that we would like to investigate in a more
informed way. The existing reservoir is 20' high and basically invisible.
There is a big difference in growing trees to screen a 20' high structure
vs. a 40' high structure. Which would be, realistically, optimally screened
sooner - a 30' high x 140' diameter tank that is 100 feet from our house
or a 40' high x 120' diameter tank that is 120 feet from our house? We
would like the City to provide consultation with an engineer and
landscape professional, who specializes in mitigation, or whomever is
most appropriate, so that the best decision may be reached with the least
possible visual impact to residents.
d. Existing tree screen: We request to have input about priority existing
trees that are important to the visual screen of residents. We would like
to hear from the City as to what is the best means and process for
facilitating this communication. We would like to know what percentage
of trees will be removed. We would like assurance from the City that great
care and careful consideration and scrutiny will be employed in
determining what trees to clear out, and we would like included in this
assurance, an accountability plan. Who will be checking on this when it
comes time to break ground?
e. Dig down for needed capacity: What tradeoffs are involved with the
option of lowering the height by digging down? I'm not talking about
burying the entire tank, but perhaps burying more of it than has
previously been discussed (e.g., for a 35 foot high tank, perhaps bury 15
feet so we only see 20 feet). Can pumps be utilized to compensate for the
elevation differentiation this would present with the existing tank?
f. Mitigation: The City's Water Partnership staff have made it clear that they
intend to work with surrounding neighbors to discuss mitigation and
planting options. We are, of course, very interested in having these
discussions, understanding what the best options are, and participating
in the planning. We obviously want the tank to be invisible (year-round)
as soon as possible. The use of berms, tree placement for optimal
screening, and selection of dense, mature, fast-growing evergreens on
the City's property are all things we fully anticipate discussing with the
appropriate experts. We would like to hold these conversations sooner
than later to increase our understanding of what the options and decision
points are.
2. Safety: Our very real concerns about safety are threefold.
a. Tank failure: Surrounding neighbors are fearful of having 7.5 million
gallons of water (4 million in the existing reservoir and 3.5 million
page 3 of 5 Waterbury letter to Council regarding proposed Waluga Reservoir #2
proposed for the second reservoir) in a residential setting, in very close
proximity of our homes. We would like assurance that the City has
studied the possibility that one or both reservoirs could fail, either due to
design flaw, or to an earthquake. We would like the City to inform
neighbors where all this water would go in such an event. We would like
the City to provide a fact -based, non -biased description of what the
actual risks are to our homes and to the personal safety of our families
(e.g., what level of a quake are the reservoirs built to survive, what would
the release of that amount of water look like [a tidal wave, flying debris,
or a few inches seeping into the basement?]. We would like assurance
that the City has a plan in place to deal with the worst should it ever
come to be, and we want to be informed of what this plan is.
b. Illicit Activity: There has historically been problems with graffiti, camping,
and undesirable people parking on Parkhill Street to engage in drug
activity around the existing reservoir. Neighbors have been vigilant over
the years and, as a result, this activity has decreased. We are concerned
that, with a new and expanded venue for concealed activities, this illicit
activity may increase. This is alarming in the context of the safety of our
children and our homes. We want the City to be aware of this problem,
and we want to engage in meaningful discussions and planning with City
consultants/staff who have experience and proven success in
implementing strategies for minimizing such activity.
c. Construction: Safety concerns stemming from construction include the
danger to our children of having trucks regularly coming up and down
our street as well as a large number of workers who are unknown to us
and to our children. We have been told that it is likely that construction
staging and access will occur off of Carman Drive. We would like
assurance that this is the case and assurance that Parkhill Street will not
be the default parking lot for the many workers who might be involved in
this construction process.
3. Construction: We understand from Mr. Komarek that construction will take
about a year. We would like to be informed well in advance of ground breaking,
and be provided with a projected timeline for construction, periods of
significant disruption, and key milestones.
a. Blasting: In addition to the construction -related safety concerns outlined
above, we have serious concerns about proposed blasting that will likely
come as part of this project. This is clearly very disruptive and scary to
have this go on so near to one's home. We would like assurance from the
City that blasting will occur in a way that will have no negative impact on
nearby homes (E.g. cracked foundation). We would like the City to have a
page 4 of 5 Waterbury letter to Council regarding proposed Waluga Reservoir #2
plan in place and communicated to nearby residents of what the recourse
is should it be found that the blasting did cause damage to a home or
property. We would like the City to have a plan in place for informing
neighbors of any and all blasting that will occur well in advance. We
would like the minimal possible blasting needed to occur.
b. Noise and general disruption: I could hear the surveyors speaking to each
other back in the woods clear as a bell, which was an indicator to me of
how well sound travels here. We will want to enter into an agreement with
the City outlining acceptable and reasonable times and days of the week
for work in order to minimize disruption. Our neighborhood is made up
primarily of retirees and families with young children, so, as a
community, we are around a lot. We will suffer for the noise and
disruption, and so are very interested in engaging in negotiation around
ways to reduce this.
4. Pipeline: We were told at one of the meetings with Water Partnership staff that
the proposed Waluga Reservoir #2 will likely connect to the pipeline corridor on
Parkhill Street. The primary concern with this is that it could mean removing the
mature evergreen trees that currently screen the existing reservoir. This would
be rubbing salt in the wound and it is our sincere hope that this eventuality will
not come to be. We would like to be kept updated on discussions about
connecting the proposed reservoir #2 to the pipeline and what this process will
mean, in terms of construction on Parkhill Street and exposure of the existing
reservoir.
The concerns above are laid out in all honesty and we feel they are valid concerns that
merit serious consideration by City Council. Mr. Komarek has pointed out more than
once that a water tower is a quiet neighbor. This may very well be true, once
construction is complete, and assuming effective strategies are employed to minimize
illicit activities. If, after obtaining answers to our many questions outlined in this letter,
the City determines it best to proceed with the current location, we respectfully ask
that the Council hold the Water Partnership team accountable for incorporating into the
design plan all possible strategies for reducing the safety risks, size and visual impact
to surrounding neighbors.
I look forward to continued discussions with Water Partnership staff and City Council
about this issue that is so important to me and my neighbors.
Sincerely,
Amy Waterbury
4933 Parkhill Street
waterbuWa(@yahoo.com
503-724-5121
page 5 of 5 Waterbury letter to Council regarding proposed Waluga Reservoir #2
DEFECTS IN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
p13/nY""�
m
3
S
i b
y
ul
%
2.kli F U v v
t L. 2 z
I � `� +t ... � ♦ 7 � � L O � II /� � 7 G
0 Os
\ O Y O O Y O C L O
>- Ot f
Ulfuj
QCT u o ro as3 Ys
t)fl a, J \\ �; 9CJ09 pE to0
o do 0p
WUj
UJ
1 p•� SY.
as O ca.... g 1 • l
tilr s ♦■ ■� & A ■ ■ (■�♦ JCI W
20 -, >
J U f ti ■ ?g
• ::
f 3:
ISN
Y'
Z
LLJ.,
x
c
\ �2Z
--"-.—_....__.__ __... =s=ue-,- --•�—• _ "P=- �..., � •.., ` ° .¢.l 3
:5 1 �UO--J
ZT I ti„��Y/ r II II II II
r�
1
J U a J
LAKE OSWEGO
Centennial 1910-2010
COUNCIL REPORT
TO: Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
Alex D. McIntyre, City Manager
FROM: David Donaldson, Assistant City Manager
-7,1
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
380 A Avenue
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
503-675-3984
www.ci.oswego.or.us
SUBJECT: Presentation on potential commercial food recycling and rate adjustment (decrease), and
status update on recent sustainability initiatives by Allied Waste
DATE: September 28, 2010
r-1111111[0610
Allied Waste, the City's contracted waste hauler, would like Council support to move forward with a
commercial food waste recycling program. The first step in this process would be a recommended 4%
decrease in commercial rates for any source -separated commercial food waste to encourage participation.
With Council's affirmation, a resolution to that effect will be drafted for the November 2nd City Council
meeting.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The City and Allied Waste Services are committed to the goal of "Zero Waste" and the promotion and
implementation of recycling programs that make progress toward achieving that goal. The City is also
committed to finding ways to provide services either directly or through contractors and/or franchisees in
the most efficient and cost effective manner. Allied Waste is working closely as a partner with the City and
its Sustainability Advisory Board (SAB) along with the Lake Oswego School District.
City staff and one member of the SAB traveled to the Pacific Region Compost Facility (PRC) 10 miles north
of Corvallis on Thursday, September 30th and will provide a very brief summary of what they observed. The
PRC is owned and operated by a sister company of Allied Waste. In addition, staff and several Council
members are scheduled to tour the Willamette Resource Inc (WRI) transfer and recycling facility in
Wilsonville on Thursday, October 7.
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Attached are two letters from Allied Waste. The first letter outlines a proposal to move positively toward
the goal of zero waste advocated by our Sustainability Advisory Board. One step in this direction would be
accomplished through the recycling and composting of commercial food waste. The letter outlines how
this could be accomplished, gives an example of how it might work with a local restaurant (Gubancs), and
illustrates how a change in cost structure could reduce rates for commercial establishments (primarily
grocery stores, restaurants and schools). The first step would involve incenting business to change their
practices through a lower rate and gaining the critical mass (35-50 customers) to make the program viable.
The second letter gives a progress report on the sustainability efforts Allied Waste has made since last
meeting with the Council this past March. It includes their work with the Lake Oswego School District,
articles in city publications, and changes to their systems and operations.
ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT
No impact
RECOMMENDATION
Move forward with commercial food recycling effort including rate reduction with the hope it will create a
critical mass that will make the program viable
ATTACHMENTS
Letter from Carole Dion, General Manager dated October 5 titled Request for Collection of Food Waste
Letter from Carole Dion, General Manager dated October 5 titled Progress report
Reviewed by:
Alex D. M clnty
City Manager
"A'Wr
October 5, 2010 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES
Honorable Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of Lake Oswego City Council
380 A Avenue
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
RE: Request for New Rate for Collection of Food Waste
Mayor Hoffman and Members of City Council:
The City of Lake Oswego and Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego are committed to
the goal of "Zero Waste."
Earlier this year representatives of Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego met several
times with the City's Sustainability Advisory Board to discuss changing collection
methods to increase recycling among our commercial customers. One such change
examined was collection of pre- and post -consumer food waste source -separated by
restaurant, grocery store and school customers prior to collection. This food waste can
be processed for reuse. In this case, we propose to process food waste for compost.
The City of Lake Oswego has a significant advantage with implementation of this
proposed new waste collection program. Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego's sister
company, Pacific Region Compost Facility (PRC), owns and operates a compost facility
approximately 60 -miles south of the City of Lake Oswego and 10 -miles north of the City
of Corvallis, a site formerly known as Camp Adair. PRC is the only company in Oregon
authorized by DEQ to receive and compost pre- and post -consumer food waste. Allied's
investment in PRC clearly demonstrates our company's commitment to sustainability.
Several members of the City's staff toured PRC on September 301n
The Sustainability Advisory Board unanimously recommended the City Council support
the collection of source -separated pre- and post -consumer food waste generated in the
City by restaurants, grocery stores and schools.
New Rate Proposal. Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego proposes to discount the
City's current approved collection rate by four -percent (4%) for any type of container with
only source -separated food waste. This proposed discount reflects Metro's exemption of
source -separated food waste from its Regional System Fee and Excise Tax, offset by
additional costs for inefficiency incurred by Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego to
start collecting source -separated food waste from a few customers.
Customer Contact. Representatives of Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego met with
the owner of Gubanc's Pub Restaurant on September 22, 2010. Several members of
the Sustainability Advisory Board informed us Gubanc's should be a good place to
introduce this new collection program due to the owner's commitment to sustainable
practices. Our discussion with the owner confirmed his commitment to source -
separated food waste if it is at all feasible.
Our first step was to explain how Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego proposed to
implement the program. Next we examined the 1 -yard container Gubanc's uses for
disposal of its waste. Our initial assessment was most of the waste in the container
10295 SW Ridder Road
Wilsonville, OR 97070
503.570.0626 / FAX 503.570.0523
www,disposal.com
could be diverted from a landfill and used to prepare compost. We asked the owner if
we could take the container to our transfer station in Wilsonville, Willamette Resources,
Inc., to hand -sort and identify the types of waste that could be diverted from a landfill.
The owner agreed and we sorted the material in the container the day after our meeting.
The results of the sort indicated at least 80% of the container's content is compostable.
Potential Additional Savings for our Customers. Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego
believes our commercial customers source -separating food waste can realize savings in
their waste collection costs by changing the size of container(s) they now use for waste
disposal. For example, the current cost to Gubanc's for collection of a 1 -yard container
of mixed waste three -times a week is $360.29/month. It may be possible for Gubanc's,
when implementing source -separation of food waste, to use three 95 -gallon roll carts
instead of the 1 -yard container: two for food waste and one for garbage. If this were the
case, the cost to collect the three 95 -gallon roll cart three times a week would be
$326.40/month with the 4% discount applied to the two food waste carts. This could be
an opportunity for our customer to save $33.89/month from current collection costs.
Need Active and Visible Support of City in Collection of Source -Separated Food Waste.
The success of diverting food waste from a landfill will require the leadership of the City
to convince businesses operating in the City the Council is fully committed to recovery of
food waste. Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego needs the active support of the City
to enable our company to represent to businesses and the school district we are
implementing this program at the request of the City.
Our company needs approximately 60 -commercial customers for a cost-effective
program to collect source -separated food waste. The support of the City is critical for
our company achieving this number of customers.
For your information, our company has not contacted any other businesses or the school
district regarding this proposed new collection program. Our company is waiting for
approval of this new collection program by the City before doing so.
Summary. The more businesses source -separating food waste the more significant will
be the diversion of this waste from a landfill. In addition, this new collection program has
the real potential of providing the opportunity for many of the City's restaurants, grocery
stores and schools to reduce waste collection costs.
Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego will report in six -months the results of its
outreach effort to businesses and the school district to source -separate food waste.
Respectfully,
Carol��GeneraMa�
ge
Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego
cc: Steve Brum, Controller, Allied Waste Services
Craig Holmes, Operations Manager, Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego
Frank Lonergan, Operations Manager, Allied Waste Services
David Donaldson, Assistant Manager, City of Lake Oswego
2
-Apr
October 5, 2010 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES
Honorable Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of Lake Oswego City Council
380 A Avenue
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
RE: Progress Report of Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego
Solid Waste Activities in City
Mayor Hoffman and Members of City Council:
The City of Lake Oswego and Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego are committed to
the goal of "Zero Waste."
During our discussions last March regarding increasing collection rates, the Council
requested Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego evaluate its current sustainability and
waste collection practices. The general idea prompting this request was to determine
how to increase waste recovery as well as examine current levels of service to
determine if it is possible to maintain the same quality of service while minimizing future
cost increases.
Following is our first report regarding the five specific tasks identified by Council for
action by Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego in conjunction with the City.
1. Solid Waste Plan for City. Allied Waste Services was asked to coordinate this
effort with the City's Sustainability Advisory Board. Councilor Sally Moncrieff is Council's
liaison with this Board.
Preparation of such a Plan is a long-term effort for which Allied Waste Services of Lake
Oswego is fully committed. There are several actions already taken and proposed for
the future for inclusion in the City's Solid Waste Plan:
✓ Use roll carts for automated collection of recyclable materials. In 2004, The City
authorized our company to use roll carts to collect commingled recycling. These carts
enabled our customers to commingle various types of recyclable materials. Previous to
2004, our customers separated recyclables by waste type before placement at the curb
or disposed the recyclables in regular garbage.
There was a substantial increase in waste recovery among our residential customers
after roll carts were distributed. Waste recovery from 2004 through 2006 by residential
customers increased 16.15%, while waste recovery among our commercial customers
increased 7.82%. During this same three years, the City's population increased 4.9%,
yet the volume of regular garbage increased only 2.3%.
Waste recovery of recyclables by our customers for the most recent 12 -month period
shows a 63.5% residential recovery rate and a commercial recovery rate of 43.3%. In
our opinion, the City's overall recovery rate today might be nearly 70% if Allied Waste
Services of Lake Oswego were able to include in our recovery rate calculation of the
volume of recyclables our customers take directly to other recyclers, such as Foothills
10295 SW Ridder Road
Wilsonville, OR 97070
503.570.0626 / FAX 503.570,0523
www.disposal.com
Recycling, privately owned recyclable processors, Lions Club, plus recyclables removed
from the city by illegal drop box service.
✓ Diversion of pre- and post -consumer food waste generated by businesses
operating in City. Although the performance of our commercial customers is not as
significant as compared to the results achieved by our residential customers, the waste
stream of many of our commercial customers is not conducive for diverting several
recyclable commodities from a landfill under current collection methods available to
commercial customers. One such change in collection methods is source -separation of
food waste.
✓ Examples of Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego's sustainability commitment
o Use B20 biodiesel fuel in company's vehicles to reduce carbon footprint.
o Use biodegradable hydraulic fluid in company's collection vehicles to
protect the environment in the event of a spill.
o Equip all collection vehicles with an auto -shutoff mechanism that turns off
vehicle's engine after five -minutes of idling to reduce carbon footprint.
o Provide collection service for City's special events.
Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego will be discussing with the City's
Sustainability Advisory Board the possibility of changing the frequency of waste
collection in the City. For example, should the City consider changing from every
week collection of one or more types of waste to collection every other week?
Another discussion will deal with collection of glass in the commingled recycling roll cart.
If this change is desired, current regulations of Department of Environmental Quality and
Metro will need to be changed.
These two additional items are directed toward the Council's interest to maintain the
current quality of waste collection service while minimizing the impact of increasing
operating costs incurred by Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego.
Product stewardship and environmentally acceptable packaging will need to be
discussed in order to advance toward our shared goal of "Zero Waste."
2. Prepare recycling and sustainability articles for City's monthly newsletter —
HelloLO. Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego is coordinating this effort with
Councilor Sally Moncrieff and the Editor of HelloLO, Bonnie Hirshberger.
Starting with the May 2010 HelloLO publication, Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego
has each month prepared an article for this publication. Our articles provided
information regarding:
✓ Weekly yard debris collection;
✓ Recognition of efforts of Lake Oswego Schools "Going Green" through
implementation of aggressive sustainable practices;
✓ Recycling electronic waste;
✓ "Zero waste" lunches for students returning to school:
✓ Recycling plastics.
N
3. Collection of food waste. Allied Waste Services of Lake Oswego and the City
Council should be implementing this program during the next few months.
4. Obtain Green School Certification for all Lake Oswego School District Buildings.
An Oregon Green School certification status is the result of the school developing and
sustaining successful recycling and resource efficiency programs. In September 2009,
Lake Oswego School District had five school buildings certified as Green Schools. By
June 2010, the District had all 13 schools certified as Green Schools.
5. Schedule a time for City Council to tour Willamette Resources, Inc. and Pacific
Region Compost Facility. Dates for these tours are scheduled.
Respectfully,
Carol Dion, General anager
Allied Waste Servic s of Lake Oswego
cc: Steve Brum, Controller, Allied Waste Services
Craig Holmes, Operations Manager, Allied Waste Services
Frank Lonergan, Operations Manager, Allied Waste Services
David Donaldson, Assistant Manager, City of Lake Oswego
3
4040 Douglas Way
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
503/635.9393
503/635-1526
Officers
Directors
2009-2010
Chuck O'Leary
President
Jack Lundeen
Secretary
Sid Smither
Treasurer
Deanna Bitar
Director
Mike Buck
Director
Adelle Jenike
Director
Vic Keeler
Director
Nancy LaBonte
Director
George Psihogios
Director
Ken Sandblast
Director
Joe Buck
Director
11 ,0/5110
Lake Grove Business Association
Serving the business community since 1986
October 5th, 2010
Honorable Jack Hoffman, Mayor
Members of Lake Oswego City Council
380 A Avenue
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
RE: City's New Program For Collecting Source -Separated Food Waste
Mayor Hoffman and Members of City Council:
Our Board of Directors received formation at our regular meeting today regarding the
city's new program to allow businesses generating food waste to source -separate this
waste for the purpose of keeping it out of the landfill. We understand the city's program
will also enable our school district to source -separate its food waste.
Ray Phelps, a representative of the city's waste collection provider, Allied Waste
Services of Lake Oswego, explained his company and the city's Sustainability Advisory
Board developed this new program over the past several months. This program is
another step toward fulfilling the city's commitment of "Zero Waste."
Gubanc's Pub Restaurant, an Association member, has agreed to be Allied's first
customer to source separate its food waste. Preliminary data shows Gubanc's should be
diverting more than 80% of its waste from a landfill once this new program starts. An
additional benefit for Gubanc's is a cost reduction for monthly waste collection.
Our Association is committed to support the outreach efforts of the City and Allied to
encourage as many food waste generating businesses as possible to source separate the
food waste the business generates. We recognize the City and Allied alone cannot
implement the city's new program
The Lake Grove Business Association enthusiastically supports this program and
encourages the Council to move forward with implementation as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
64e -
Chuck
Chuck O'Leary
President
cc: David Donaldson, Assistant City Manager, City of Lake Oswego
DEFECTS IN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
LAKE OSWEGO OREGON
CENTENNIAL 1910-2010
BRYANT PIONEER DAY
CHAS
W HV"#l'AW'
r t 3 "1 ir
.
r
p
14
L.
ir
Ott; i
Cenntenial Event
Text on Bryant Memorial plaque located across from fire station 211 on Corner of Jean
Road and Bryant Road, next to the tennis courts.
1853
This stone marks
the home site of
Charles Wesley Bryant
and his wife Mary Fay Bryant
who left North Java N.Y in
the spring of 1853. They
traveled by covered wagon
train with a group of
missonaries led by Rev.
Harvey K. Hines. They
arrived in Oct. 1853 and
accquired this
homestead. Seven of their
nine children were born,
and all reared in this
home. Alta and Vesper
born in N.Y.,
Hale D., Elia C., Lee, Mary,
Charles P, Myra, Cordelia.
The were always active in
church and community
betterment. All honor to
those courageous pioneers.
1947
DEFECTS IN
ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT
U +j
a� o o -o
Cd 0
0 x .r+
CdcaeyC N
O
0 0 +j Q
� 3 �3 16
~~
U U
Z V Cd Cd
w cd
-d° "o„wo
I:$ Iz
��
cd Cdx� �o
�o b
5-4 cd
�u Cd
o �,� ��o
.� o
° o x �4 o� c °Cd
V y
cd ed �i U Cd
Q'' a c}"Ci .�
� c� Cd V U � 4; p
N U
114 t
h
o 00 .r •roj �
1., o Cd
cd
a.95
i
J�v:cz cdCd
3
Id _ ►�
�n eQ 4N U c6
cd
0 Cd
u Cd
0 Cd
Cly cq40 W3
V bEGO 0W , 5'b z �y�
��Cdcd
co j p 4
�p�� s of=�Z
CU ci
id ry r
aCd
b =°a.° Q.x c°�
U p h "ocd u Uit
TIRE
E
w
Ad
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
�MINUTES
October 5, 2010
Mayor Jack Hoffman called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. on
October 5, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Olson, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini.
Councilor Moncrieff was excused.
Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie,
City Recorder; Joel Komarek, LOIS Project Director; Jane Heisler, LOIS
Communications Director; Sidaro Sin, Senior Planner; Bill Baars, Library
Director; Jan Wirtz, Parks & Recreation; Police Officer Steve Filippelli;
Deputy Fire Marshall Gert Zoutendijk; Fireman Neil Klein, Fireman Toby
Hayes, Fireman Andrew Owens, David Donaldson, Asst City Manager
3. PRESENTATIONS
3.1 LOIS Update
Mr. Komarek mentioned that the 24 -foot draw down of the lake has generated a lot of interest in
the community. He reported that the contractor has finished the Foothills CIPP work. He indicated
that the debris sump at the Hunt Club was nearly done, with the second debris sump of several
going in at Maple Circle. He said that the Bryant pump station work was progressing on schedule.
He presented several slides depicting what the City has found upon resumption of its near shore
sewer inspection. He said that they have notified homeowners as necessary regarding needed
repairs. They were also talking with the Lake Corporation about an information piece to alert
homeowners to take advantage of this opportune time to address any problems that they might
discover.
He showed a slide of signage that the City created in partnership with the Lake Corporation
warning people to stay off the lakebed because some areas were soupy mud that functioned like
quicksand. He encouraged people to view the lake from the bridges and other vantage points.
Ms. Heisler said that they have been dealing with many phone complaints, most of them focusing
on noise. She mentioned that the lake draw down has attracted a lot of media attention. She
noted that the Fire Department has been practicing mud rescues.
She reported that they were talking to bypass pump neighbors because of the bypass
configurations coming online in October and December. She noted the several road closures in
October, including Bryant Road and North Shore Road at the bridge. She mentioned that they
would only close one lane of State Street at night from here on out.
Mr. Komarek reported that the project was on schedule, with the team having just issued the final
certification of completion for the lake full phase. He noted that they were two-thirds of the way to
the $90 million cost estimate, and they might even bring the project under that amount.
Councilor Jordan asked if the City planned to work with the Lake Corporation to remove the
debris dumped into the lake over the years, which was now visible. Ms. Heisler said that Jeff
Ward at the Lake Corporation was working on clean up procedures for neighbors interested in
doing just that. She mentioned doing it all during one particular week so that the clean up could be
monitored and done safely.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 9
October 5, 2010
Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Jordan that Lily Bay was a pocket of water with its own
natural `dam,' which prevented it from draining down to the 24 -foot level.
At Councilor Hennagin's request, Mr. Komarek explained that the purpose of the debris sumps
was to trap debris that found its way into sewer lines from a variety of sources and prevent it from
entering the buoyant portion of the new interceptor sewer. He indicated that the City was installing
five debris sumps at strategic locations, which City operations crews could clean out more easily
than if the material made it into the lake.
Mr. Komarek indicated to Councilor Olson that the City deposited the sediment dredged from the
lake at Tigard Sand & Gravel in Washington County. He explained that they tested the site for
suitability to handle these sediments per the solid waste permits the City obtained. He said that he
believed that the Lake Corporation disposed of its dredging material at the same place.
At Mayor Hoffman's request, Mr. Komarek reviewed the timeline regarding the lake. He said
that, by agreement with the Lake Corporation, the City had to re -fill the lake to a 16 -foot draw down
level beginning in mid-January and be finished with its work by March 21 to allow the Lake
Corporation to begin refilling the lake.
3.2 Comprehensive Plan Update
Mr. Sin presented a flyer that went out with Hello LO announcing the upcoming public meetings on
October 12 and 16 at the West End Building. He indicated that the purpose of the meetings was to
engage the community in a more specific discussion about the future of Lake Oswego. He said
that staff would present the results of the survey, to which they received 830 responses. He
mentioned further discussion at the meetings with the community regarding community values.
He indicated that staff intended to use the survey results as the foundation to develop the
community vision for the next 25 years. He noted that staff intended the survey to gauge the pulse
of the community; they hoped to do a more statistically valid survey in early 2011 to validate the
vision process. After that, staff would come to Council for its endorsement of the vision in order to
move forward with developing policies and goals for the Comprehensive Plan. He invited the
community to the October meetings.
3.3 LO Reads
Mr. Baars stated that the goal behind the LO Reads program was creating a community bond
through reading and discussing the same book. He invited the Council and the community to
participate in the program next January and February by reading the book and attending the free
events, which would expand on the cultural, social, political, and historical themes within the book.
He reviewed the selection criteria and process for the book. He recalled that over 8,000 people
participated in last year's program with over 35 events focusing on The Whistling Season by Ivan
Doig. He announced the 2011 selection: Cutting for Stone by Dr. Abraham Verghese. He
described it as the story of twin brothers born and raised in Mission Hospital in Ethiopia, which
spanned decades and countries.
He mentioned the support received from the Friends of the Library; West Coast Bank, Fred &
Shirley Baldwin, the City of Lake Oswego, and the City Council. He said that this fifth year of LO
Reads would begin on January 11, 2011 at the Lake Oswego Library with a give away of 800 free
copies of the book, courtesy of the Friends of the Library.
Mayor Hoffman indicated that he has read the book, which he described as long and challenging
with themes that would stretch the community. Councilor Jordan commented that it was a
positive book. She suggested that people pass the book on to someone else when they finished it.
Mr. Baars mentioned that people often returned the free books to the library and the staff handed
them out from the circulation desk.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 9
October 5, 2010
3.4 Community Planning Month Proclamation
Mayor Hoffman proclaimed October 2010 as Community Planning Month.
3.5 Parks and Recreation Summer Camp Highlights
Ms. Wirtz gave a PowerPoint presentation on the 11 weeks of over 75 summer camps provided
through the Lake Oswego Parks & Recreation Department. She reported that they served over
1,200 youth and teens from ages 3 to 17. She described the many different types of camps,
including Missoula Children's Theater, Summer Daze, Kindercamp, Lego Engineering, a variety of
sports camps, Fencing, Dance, CSI Camp, Kirsten's Camp, Fairy Camp, Wizardry Camp,
Skateboarding, Tennis, Golf, Teen Service, and Safety Town.
She mentioned that Officer Steve Filippelli helped with setting up a crime scene for the CSI
campers to solve. She noted that the Teen Service Camp included two days of service and one
day of adventure. She described the major safety lessons presented during the five days of Safety
Town for campers aged 4 to 6. She introduced Officer Steve Filippelli, Deputy Fire Marshall
Zoutendijk, and Firemen Toby Hayes, Neil Klein, and Andrew Owens, acknowledging them for their
work in teaching safety to the campers. She indicated that Safety Town was made possible by a
$3,600 grant from the Alliance for Community Traffic Safety (ODOT).
3.6 White Cane Days Proclamation
Mayor Hoffman read the proclamation declaring October 16, 2010, as Lions' White Cane Day in
Lake Oswego in recognition of the many years of the Lions Clubs' dedication to sight conservation
and restoration and improving the quality of life for the blind and sight -challenged individuals within
the state. He mentioned that White Cane Days was the Lake Grove Lions Club's annual sight
fundraiser to restore the sight of children and adults in Oregon and to provide supporting grants for
sight -impaired individuals needing medical care or other forms of assistance.
Mark Ritacco, Lake Grove Lions Club President, noted that their club formed in 1964. He
observed that the Lions did more than help the blind. He reviewed several of their other programs,
including Flags for First Graders, Peace Poster Contest (middle school), sponsoring three Boy
Scout troops, camp scholarships (camperships), Legal Club (high school), and Salvation Army bell
ringing. He mentioned their fundraisers, including White Cane Days, Fourth of July Barbeque, and
selling tools during Mother's Day weekend.
Jake Jacobssen, Lions Club International, told the story of the Lions Clubs, beginning in 1917
Chicago when Melvin Jones decided that the affluent businessmen in the Business Circle needed
to do something to help the less fortunate. Within two years, the Lions Club went international
when a club formed in Windsor, Canada. The Lions were now the largest service club in the world
with 1.35 million members in 45,000 clubs in 206 countries.
He indicated that, in 1925, the Lions Clubs became "knights of the blind in their crusade against
darkness" in response to a challenge by Helen Keller at their International Convention in Ohio. He
mentioned the work that the Lions Clubs International sponsored around the world to help people
with sight problems through raising millions of dollars, and their goal of eradicating preventable
blindness.
He described the White Cane project as another smaller facet of fundraising from the local
communities, which funds they would put back in the community through the Oregon Lions Sight &
Hearing Foundation. He mentioned that helping the deaf became a main thrust of the Lions in the
1950s, as Helen Keller was both blind and deaf.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor Olson moved the Consent Agenda. Councilor Jordan seconded the motion. A
voice vote was taken, and the motionap ssed with Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin,
Olson, Tierney, Jordan, and Vizzini voting `aye.' [6-0]
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 9
October 5, 2010
4.1 REPORTS
4.1.1 Resignation from the Historic Resources Advisory Board
Action: Accept Resignation from Erin O'Rourke-Meadors
4.2 RESOLUTIONS
4.2.1 Resolution 10-60, approving an appointment to the citizen advisory committee for the
comprehensive plan update
Action: Adopt Resolution 10-60.
4.2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4.2.1 June 8, 2010, special meeting
4.2.2 June 15, 2010, regular meeting
Action: Approve minutes as written
END CONSENT AGENDA
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
6. CITIZEN COMMENT
R.A. Fontes, 310 Second Street
Mr. Fontes distributed a handout to the Council. He pointed out that the demographic trends for
Lake Oswego as reported by Todd Chase (p.1, Table 1) also applied to West Linn. He argued
that, based on that information, there was nothing happening in either city to justify Metro's bus trip
time and rider ship projections. He observed that the bus trips of an aging population were not
stereotypical commutes, but rather occurred outside the regular commute hours (Table 1). He
contended that, contrary to the Metro forecasts by John Colleton for major increases in corridor
traffic and resulting trip times, the long-term trend on Hwy 43 vehicle counts was down (Table 2).
He observed that transit running in mixed traffic had highly variable trip times (p.2, Table 2). He
argued that the single value bus trips given in the Metro projections were highly misleading
because they were for the slowest peak hour commutes. He used a Bungee cord to demonstrate
that most trips did not vary as much as the slowest peak commute trip. He argued that the reality
of the Hwy 43 corridor was that they should expect the no build bus option, which would include
frequent service, to remain faster and more convenient for most riders than either of the other two
alternatives.
He pointed out the lack of long-term rider ship growth shown on Chart 3 (p.3). He observed that
rider ship peaked in 2008 with $4 per gallon gas, and was now slightly below the spring 2001 level.
He argued that they were already below the rate necessary to reach Metro's projections for
weekday demand of 8,500 rides per day.
He reiterated that they had astounding rider ship and trip time projections that were not supported
by the long-term transportation data, the underlying societal trends shown in the Lake Oswego and
West Linn demographics, the net migration of jobs out of Portland, and the technological changes.
He contended that this project has not presented hard evidence justifying these projections, but
rather it has provided only more projections, assumptions, and conclusions.
He thanked the Mayor and the Council for appointing a Councilor who was a regular bus rider
• Maria Meneghin, 1179 Sunningdale Road
Ms. Meneghin referenced the West End Building (WEB) site study group presentation of various
options for Council's consideration last Tuesday. She expressed her appreciation for the work
group's thoughtful job. She observed that it was now up to the Council to decide which option to
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 9
October 5, 2010
support and bring to the public for a vote. She described the problem as defined for the work
group as "find a way to take the WEB off the interest only general fund payments and find a
resolution for the financial conundrum." She noted that they were encouraged to look at the City's
already identified and prioritized facilities needs.
She encouraged the Council to show the community that it could solve this problem by choosing
the option that most closely fulfilled its obligations and had the best chance of passing a general
obligation (GO) bond. She expressed her fear that if the Council overreached in these
economically difficult times, the WEB resolution would not have full community support and would
remain a divisive financial issue in the community.
She encouraged the Council to judge the project in the context of the City's other stated goals,
such as needing a new Maintenance facility, implementing the Lake Grove Village Center Plan,
and improving the library. She spoke of weighing the community's continuing financial good will in
achieving those goals. She stated that she strongly supported Option 4, which addressed the
WEB financial concerns and incorporated the most pressing facilities needs. She contended that
Option 4 did not muddy the GO bond issue by introducing recreational desires (such as a pool and
an indoor/outdoor skate park) not yet well studied to assess their financial impacts or weighed
alongside other recreational amenities
She encouraged the Council to keep its priorities clear and its message to the community
regarding priorities consistent. She asked the Council not to let the long-term possibilities of the
site distract it from doing what was necessary to solve the underlying WEB financial issues.
• Amy Waterbury, 4933 Park Hill Street
Ms. Waterbury explained that she was sharing the concerns of herself and her immediate
neighbors regarding the proposed Waluga Reservoir No. 2. She stated that they were very upset
about the City's proposed plans. She mentioned that she has diligently attended the meetings that
the neighbors initiated with the Water Partnership Team as well as made a statement at the
Oversight Committee. She expressed her hope that the Council has heard these neighborhood
concerns before.
She explained that her aim tonight was to insure that the Council was aware of the neighbors'
views and could voice their questions and issues for them, since they could not always ask those
questions themselves at the meetings. She spoke of insuring that the right decisions were reached
and every effort made to minimize the negative impacts on the citizens in Lake Oswego
surrounding the proposed side, including the excessive burden shouldered by a few.
She indicated that their major concerns focused on visual impact, safety concerns, and
construction impact. She observed that daily the neighbors would be looking directly at the
reservoir, which would be visible for most of the year behind the leafless deciduous trees. She
asked the Council to challenge the Water Partnership Team on the neighbors' unresolved
questions regarding visual impact, including sizing the reservoir capacity at 1.5 to 2 million gallons
to accommodate projected growth, which might or might not happen.
She contended that it was not too late to consider alternate locations. She asked what locations
would the City have looked at if this one were not available.
She indicated that the height was a major concern. She argued that a 40 -foot high structure was
completely inappropriate to a residential setting, noting that the City Code prevented homes or
structures of that height in neighborhoods. She encouraged the Council to read her letter. She
respectfully asked the Council to hold the Water Partnership Team accountable for incorporating
into the design plan all possible strategies for reducing the safety risks, size, and visual impact to
the surrounding neighbors.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 9
October 5, 2010
• Tamara Ko, 4932 Park Hill Street
Ms. Ko observed that Ms. Waterbury presented the facts, while she presented the emotional view.
She commented that, while most residents chose to purchase their homes on Park Hill Street
knowing about the water tower at the end of the street, asking them to accept a second water
tower that was twice as big with twice as much danger in the event of a catastrophic failure and a
15 month long disruption to their lives during its construction was asking them to swallow a bitter
pill. She indicated that the information from the engineers that the City chose this site in order to
provide better water pressure to a pocket of 100 houses did not sit well with the Park Hill neighbors
at all.
She contended that the Park Hill residents were already team players in having a water tower at
the end of their street. Asking them to have two water towers was excessive.
She mentioned the neighbors meeting with the committee. She indicated that most of the
neighbors felt that their thoughts and concerns were simply being appeased and not taken
seriously. She said that they were talked down to on several occasions, which behavior was
unacceptable from someone who did not live in the neighborhood. She informed the Council that
the water tower brought an illicit element with it: kids and adults doing drugs at the end of the
street. She noted that the neighbors worked diligently to clean that up, and now felt safe and
comfortable in having gotten rid of that element. However, they feared its return from other
locations if a second water tower went up.
She recalled the team telling the neighbors that it had several other potential locations, such as the
Quarry (owned by the Parks & Rec Department). She asked the Council if someone could talk with
the Parks & Rec Department about building the reservoir at the Quarry and swapping out the land
on Park Hill Street for a park. She stated her impression that there were several avenues left
unpursued, and that their concerns were not being listened to by the team.
She mentioned that the team told the neighbors that this was a done deal and that they needed to
start talking about being good neighbors. She stated that she did not think that they were at that
point yet, as there was still some fight left in the Park Hill Street neighbors. She commented that
they came tonight to make sure that the Council was aware of their concerns, as they have been
told that what went on at the meetings was not brought to the Council.
• Charles B. Ormsby, 170 SW Birdshill, Portland, Clackamas County
Mr. Ormsby distributed a map to the Council regarding the Lake Oswego to Portland Transit
Project. He explained that this map was a composite of four maps that he assembled over the
past four to five years, one of which he received from Mr. Fontes a month ago. He indicated that
the maps were the WEB map for the neighborhoods, the February 2006 population center map,
the November 2007 Metro Lake Oswego to Portland Transit Project alternatives analysis map and
corridor study areas, and the 1997 Lake Oswego Clackamas County UGMA map.
He pointed out that the map showed that almost half the city's population was not included in the
Transit Project study area. He contended that there were concerns that the City needed to
address in terms of how this project might or might not encumber the Lake Oswego School District
tax and fee base, given that the District was considering school closures within the next five years.
He stated that one of the many problems he saw with this project was the cost and benefits, or who
paid for it and who benefited from it. He pointed out that the most recent TriMet system map
showed that Lake Grove had no direct service to the Portland core area during non -peak times and
that the connections between Lake Grove and PCC were abysmal. He reiterated that the majority
of the Lake Oswego population lived in that area.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 9
October 5, 2010
7. REPORTS
7.1 Food Waste Collection, Tour Overview, and Progress Report
Mr. Donaldson introduced Carol Dion and Ray Phelps with Allied Waste Services. He
presented background information on commercial food waste collection (pp.57-58). He noted that
the highest percentage of commercial waste going into the landfill came from restaurants, the
School District, and grocery stores.
Ms. Dion mentioned that Allied Waste has provided commercial food waste collection in other
cities for a while. She indicated that they were still working out the details of their proposal to
provide this service to the City and their commercial customers in Lake Oswego. She explained
that they would approach it on a customer -by -customer basis to make sure that the program
worked successfully for their commercial customers.
She commented that the design behind their proposal that the container used by the commercial
customer be 4% less than the size of their trash container would encourage their commercial
customers to do training and educational outreach to all their staff members. She mentioned their
understanding that not everyone would be a willing participant immediately, which led to their
proposal to introduce the program to one customer at a time.
She noted that Allied and the City have already begun forging the strong partnership needed to
implement this new service level. She mentioned the staff field trip to the Pacific Region Compost
Facility (PRC) to see where the material ended up. She asked for the Council's support so that
businesses recognized that this service was something that the City and the City Council
embraced. She presented a graphic as an example of educational materials that Allied has used
in other cities to introduce this service.
Mr. Donaldson distributed samples of compost to the Council.
Councilor Tierney asked what Allied's plans were to solicit the 60 commercial customers
mentioned in its letter (p.60), and if the company needed a minimum number to make the program
work. Ms. Dion stated that Allied was ready to start as soon as they obtained the Council's
support and they could move forward with the educational piece. She explained how the collection
process would work using the already established yard debris routes in Lake Oswego.
Ms. Dion indicated to Councilor Hennagin that, while yard debris and food waste went to the
same facility, they were handled and processed separately. Mr. Donaldson mentioned that the
compost sample was a blend of yard debris and 20% food waste.
Ms. Dion confirmed to Councilor Hennagin that food waste collection required a more contained
truck than a regular drop box truck.
Mr. Donaldson presented slides from the staff field trip to the Pacific Region Compost Facility 10
miles north of Corvallis, off Hwy 99. He noted that the material sat in large piles for a year,
periodically turned over for aeration. He described the compost process from the raw material to
the final compost product. He showed two posters, one for restaurants to post in their windows to
educate their customers, and one to post in the staff area detailing what could or could not go into
the food waste container.
He referenced a letter he had sent to the Council from the Lake Grove Business Association in
support of the project. He noted that the owner of Gubanc's was present tonight as well.
He reviewed the proposed program for Lake Oswego, which would begin in November. He said
that staff would bring a resolution to Council to reduce commercial rates by about 4%. He
mentioned the potential savings to restaurant customers like Gubanc's (p.60). He commented that
some grocery stores, such as New Seasons, already had a food waste recycling program, which
the City's program would piggyback on.
Mr. Phelps indicated to Councilor Olson that Allied did not know if other businesses besides
Gubanc's were interested in the program. He explained that they followed a lead given to them by
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 9
October 5, 2010
the Sustainability Action Board in approaching Gubanc's, which was very interested in the
program. He said that they found that 90% of the material in Gubanc's trash container was
recoverable, which led them to think that this program would divert a high amount of waste from
the landfill. He mentioned his expectation that Allied would do as well with other businesses.
Councilor Vizzini asked if there might also be a reduction anticipated in sanitary sewage flow, to
the extent that restaurants sent waste down the drain. Ms. Dion said that she asked that question
during Portland's pilot project for residential food waste collection, and the water treatment people
told her that they had no way of knowing the answer. The only possibility was seeing a different
chemical composition of the flow as it went through. They have not been able to quantify that
information.
Councilor Vizzini asked if residential customers putting food waste in their yard debris recycling
containers was too simplistic a solution. Ms. Dion said that it was not too simplistic but Allied was
not ready for that today. She explained that the educational piece was critical to roll out first, as
some food waste material could potentially contaminate the yard debris load.
Councilor Jordan asked what the City knew about gleaning opportunities at restaurants and
grocery stores and how that would interact with food waste recycling. Mr. Donaldson said that he
knew that there were active gleaning groups in the County that probably had arrangements with
individual grocery stores and restaurants but he was not familiar with it. He indicated that staff
would ask that question when they talked to businesses. Councilor Olson noted that New
Seasons had a gleaning program, and Councilor Hennagin mentioned seeing gleaners at
Albertsons.
Councilor Hennagin asked if he could buy this compost at the local garden store. Ms. Dion said
no, explaining that they marketed this compost to large users, such as the Nurserymen's'
Association and ODOT, which picked it up by the truckload at the PRC.
Councilor Hennagin commented that the schools would be a great source, recalling how much
food he saw thrown away in the cafeterias when he ate lunch with his grandchildren.
Ms. Dion described to Councilor Tierney how Allied Waste's comptroller arrived at the 4%
reduction by evaluating the estimated cost reductions and increases to Allied Waste of the
program. She confirmed that they could re -calculate that figure based upon the realities of the
program. She mentioned her anticipation of two routes a week at the most, although Allied would
work with customers who might need more than that. Mr. Phelps pointed out that the real savings
came in the reconfiguration of the containers.
7.2 WEB Proposal Timeline
Mr. McIntyre reported that staff would be able to complete the operational analysis with the new
configuration of potential building development sites at the WEB site for the Council October 26
meeting. He noted that there would be some costs, as the City would need to have the consultant
who did the original analysis on the then community center plan go back into that information and
build from there.
Councilor Jordan mentioned questions she heard raised while campaigning about whether the
City could save money by not including LOCOM in the new police facility. Mr. McIntyre indicated
that staff would be able to address the issue of LOCOM.
8. INFORMATION FROM THE COUNCIL
8.1 Councilor Information
8.1.1 Hello LO announcements
Councilor Vizzini encouraged the community to submit nominations for this year's Unsung Heroes
awards by the November 1 deadline. He encouraged citizens to volunteer for the Neighbors
Helping Neighbors clean up event on October 16.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 9
October 5, 2010
8.1.2 Bryant Homestead Pioneer Plaque
Councilor Olson reported that this afternoon, on behalf of the Council, she and Councilor Jordan
accepted the rededication of the Bryant Homestead Pioneer Plaque (located near the tennis courts
at Waluga Junior High). She indicated that the third and fourth grade class from Bryant
Elementary School gave a nice presentation. She mentioned that the Palisades Garden Club has
taken volunteer responsibility to improve the site with plantings and flowers and to take care of the
actual structure.
Councilor Jordan suggested cleaning the plaque so it was readable. She commented that the
schoolchildren had not seen the plaque before, which spoke to the City doing something to call
attention to it.
8.2 Reports of Council Committees, Organizational Committees, and Intergovernmental
Committees
9. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
9.1 City Manager
9.1.1 Review of Council Schedule
9.1.2 Review of Council Schedule
9.2 City Attorney
10. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robyn &ristie
City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON December 7, 2010
Jaco.J Hoffman,
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 9
October 5, 2010