CITY of CANNON BEACH AGENDA to Help Minimize the Spread of COVID-19, the City of Cannon Beach Has Issued an Administrative Order

Home , Party popper

CITY OF CANNON BEACH AGENDA To help minimize the spread of COVID-19, the City of Cannon Beach has issued an Administrative Order. Effective August 27, 2021, all public access and participation for City Council, Commissions, Boards and Committees meetings will be virtual until further notice. Please visit the meeting page on our website for information on how to connect to Zoom or give public comment

Meeting: City Council Date: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 Time: 6:00 p.m. Location: Council Chambers, City Hall

CALL TO ORDER AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA

CONSENT AGENDA

( 1) Consideration of the Minutes of the August 3rd Regular Meeting August 10th Work Session

PUBLIC COMMENT

The Presiding Officer will call for statements from citizens regarding issues relating to the City. The Presiding Officer may limit the time permitted for presentations and may request that a spokesperson be selected for a group of persons wishing to speak.

ORDINANCE

( 2) Consideration of Ordinance 21-06 for the Purpose of Amending the Municipal Code by Amending Chapter 9.16.030 Violation – Penalty Levels If Council wished to adopt Ordinance 21-06, an appropriate motion is in order

RESOLUTION

( 3) Consideration of Resolution 21-27 for the Purpose of Approving Increases and Decreases to the FY 2021-2022 Budget by Making an Intrafund Transfer of Appropriations for Security Cameras If Council wishes to adopt Resolution 21-27, an appropriate motion is in order.

( 4) Consideration of Resolution 21-28 for the purpose of adopting a supplemental budget by making appropriations for municipal purposes of the City of Cannon Beach for fiscal year commencing July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021 for Cyber Insurance Coverage If Council wishes to adopt Resolution 21-28, an appropriate motion is in order.

( 5) Consideration of Resolution 21-29 for the Purpose of Approving Increases and Decreases to the FY 2021-2022 Budget by Making an Intrafund Transfer of Appropriations for the Receptionist/Court Clerk position If Council wishes to adopt Resolution 21-29, an appropriate motion is in order. PO Box 368 Cannon Beach, Oregon 97110 • (503) 436-1581 • TTY (503) 436-8097 • FAX (503) 436-2050 www.ci.cannon-beach.or.us • [email protected]

PROCLAMATION

( 6) Consideration of Proclamation 21-09, declaring September 15 – October 15 as National Hispanic Heritage Month in Cannon Beach If Council wishes to adopt Proclamation 21-09, an appropriate motion is in order.

ACTION ITEMS

( 7) C/M Contract Modification from City Provided Vehicle to Vehicle Allowance

( 8) Loc Voting Delegate for Annual Member Meeting

INFORMATIONAL/OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS

( 9) Monthly Status Report

(10) Mayor Communications

(11) Councilor Communications

(12) Good of the Order

ADJOURNMENT

To join from your computer, tablet or smartphone Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/99261084699?pwd=TkpjbGcxS0pCOGlMOCtSbSsxVWFMZz09 Meeting ID: 992 6108 4699 Password: 365593

To join from your phone: Phone: 1.669.900.6833 Meeting ID: 992 6108 4699 Password: 365593

View Our Live Stream: View our Live Stream on YouTube!

Public Comment: If you wish to provide public comment via Zoom for this meeting, you must submit it by noon, the day of the meeting, to [email protected]. Except for a public hearing agenda item, all Public to be Heard comments will be taken at the beginning of the meeting for both Agenda and Non-Agenda items. If you are requesting to speak during a public hearing agenda item, please indicate the specific agenda item number as your comments will be considered during the public hearing portion of the meeting when the public hearing item is considered by the Council. All written comments received by the deadline will be distributed to the City Council and the appropriate staff prior to the start of the meeting. These written comments will be included in the record copy of the meeting.

Please note that agenda items may not be considered in the exact order listed. For questions about the agenda, please contact the City of Cannon Beach at (503) 436.8052. The meeting is accessible to the disabled. If you need special accommodations to attend or participate in the meeting per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), please contact the City Manager at (503) 436.8050. TTY (503) 436-8097. This information can be made in alternative format as needed for persons with disabilities.

Posted: 2021.08.31

City of Cannon Beach Agenda September 7, 2021 Minutes of the CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, August 3, 2021 Council Chambers

Present: Mayor Sam Steidel, Council President Mike Benefield, Nancy McCarthy, Robin Risley and Brandon Ogilvie.

Excused: None

Staff: City Manager Bruce St. Denis, IT Director Rusty Barrett, City Recorder Jennifer Barrett, Chief of Police Jason Schermerhorn, Community Development Director Jeff Adams and Public Works Director Karen La Bonte

Others: City Attorney Ashley Driscoll in person and Fire Chief Marc Reckmann via Zoom

CALL TO ORDER AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Mayor Steidel called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

Steidel asked for a motion to approve the agenda.

Motion: Benefield moved to approve the agenda as presented; Ogilvie seconded.

Vote: Benefield, McCarthy, Ogilvie, Risley and Steidel voted AYE: the vote was 5:0 and the motion passed unanimously.

CONSENT AGENDA

( 1) Consideration of the Minutes of the July 6th Regular Meeting July 13th Work Session July 14th Special Meeting July 28th Work Session

Steidel asked for a motion regarding the minutes.

Risley requested an amendment to the July 13 minutes. Risley asked for the entire article she read during good of the order be in the minutes, not just referenced.

Motion: Ogilvie moved to approve the minutes for July 6th, 13th as amended, 14th & 28th; Benefield seconded.

Vote: Councilors Benefield, Ogilvie, McCarthy, Risley and Mayor Steidel voted AYE; the vote was 5:0 in favor and the motion passed unanimously.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Steidel asked for public comments.

Mary Beth Cottle PO Box 492, Cannon Beach I encourage you to get this on the ballot in November. I feel the urgency to get funding in place to address the shortfalls in infrastructure and to emergency services. We live in a place with hazards and the possibility of a big earthquake at any time and we need to be ready, so we need emergency services that survive the event. We need public works and the police department to respond, and we need to be able to count on city staff to do what they can do and it can’t happen if our equipment or people are buried in a heap of rubble or washed away. It’s imperative that it gets in place as soon as possible. If we can get additional emergency service to be ready for whatever happens that would be amazing, to have an ambulance in town with paramedics can be life saving. 20 years my husband collapsed in Portland. I did CPR and my daughter called 911. The paramedics responded in less than 5 minutes because we had paramedics nearby. Everything was done that could have saved him, but he died. I don’t know how I would feel if it took the paramedics 20 minutes to get there and I was doing CPR. I would feel like I failed him. I want people to know that everything has been done to save a life when that happens. Also, tomorrow is the Wayfinding Wednesday exercise at 5:30 pm. Head out to the nearest assembly point and practice walking the route and invite everyone to join and walk to their assembly area and practice.

Deb Atiyeh I have a dream of hope that we can hear each other and agree what is best for community. To hear Chief Reckman’s sounds of emergency services. A dream of the police department and working conditions of staff, clean water. Hear Bruce talking to you about having the tools for safety. You will listen to the content of the words and professional expertise. That Cannon Beach will be sufficiently funded for safety. Businesses and restaurants will survive, and we will help. Please pass this tonight and save us. I dream of keeping us safe and am not sure what tomorrow will bring. Some think it won’t happen in Cannon Beach and would rather burry their heads in sand. I did happen to us last summer when my cousin perished in Beachy Creek Fire. I dream of keeping people in the town safe. The responsibility of safety is on your should right here and now.

Ken Potter PO Box 492 I am strongly in favor of the prepared food tax. I think the most significant thing is there is not a viable alternative. Adding to property tax is too big of burden on residents of the city to carry the protection of thousands of visitors. That proper services for those crowds should not come from property taxes and I don’t see any other way. It seems simple to me.

Bob Krohl PO Box 1365 I want to express support for the prepared food tax. As Ken said it appears there is not an alternative and we looked at many options. Restaurants were well represented and after the meeting Bruce gave a good summary of the needs and issues. I wish that you would have said that at the beginning of the meeting and the restaurants were able to hear it. You should all be in favor of it. I have been asking people for their thoughts and all that I spoke with are strongly in favor and a half of visitors think that it’s a great idea and they take no issue with a pass through tax.

Angela Benton PO Box 591 Thank you, Council, for your hard work. The contentious atmosphere the last few times so I sat back and thought we all want similar things. A thriving healthy city, a beautiful town, good infrastructure, clean water, good public services, etc. We want a successful business environment and an effective government. If my house burns there or there is an accident or there is a medical emergency, a child is drowning or a tsunami I want to know that we are ready. If that happens we are an island and we have to depend on the city and each other. We want the same thing and how we go about it is different. The citizens of the city can’t bear the burden of all it will cost to keep the services viable for the city. I am with Bob, if you can reverse and pass tonight that would be my dream. But if not possible please put on the ballot in November.

Lindsey Oyala-Bond I grew up here and am 37 years old. I grew up in restaurant industry, served at the Wine House, friends with a lot of people that try to afford to live here. It’s hard, there is no affordable housing. I have a friend that was begging people to sleep in the backyards and found a place at Sea Ranch and he will live there until he can find something else. There is a shortage of affordable housing. In the food industry servers rely on tips and they will be reduced if this passes, and the wait stall will have to explain this to everyone when they come in. You have to explain

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council August 3, 2021 Page 2 of 10 everything to them. They may not get that extra tip and it is needed for people to afford to live here. There is a need for City Hall and Police, but I don’t think pigeon holing the tax on restaurants and those people working there as they will carry the burden. Not sure how younger generations will afford to live here.

Bob Atiyeh PO Box 1426 At the July 14 meeting, Council voted to put 5% on resolution. I thought it would pass and now I am not sure. I worry about voter turnout even though it’s our safety involved. People do not feel the sense of urgency to fix it. Th City is in a deep financial hole, and we need to fix it. If it doesn’t pass the city will be trouble and fire doesn’t have options to fix it. I worry about the fire department if it doesn’t pass. We are a national tourist destination and some of our infrastructure is a disgrace and PD works in a cramped building and City Hall and the Police Department is unhealthy. The EOC will be obliterated in an emergency and will not be able to respond. The water system needs upgrading for disasters. A large part of system will be destroyed in large event. If not a prepared food tax, how are we going to do this. Sorry for the restaurants and wish there was more affordable housing. I would like to see more of a collaborative approach instead of combative. It would be fair if just residents, but if ORLA gets involved it would be David vs Goliath. ORLA has never lost a campaign. We will end up with a grass roots effort vs ORLA. I am afraid of divisive acrimonious fight in this town. We all have to live in this town after November 2nd. Worry about our town and the collective safety to all of us. Atiyeh read a quote he came across this morning.

Colleen Donnelly via Zoom Thank you, Mayor and Council, it’s been very informative listening to testimony. I’ve been a Cannon Beach homeowner, generational home owner with my family since the early 60’s. I just love this community and agree with everything being said, we have to make it work with our community. When I heard about the shortage of housing about 8 years ago my family restructured one of our beach cottages and entered in city with an agreement that we could do that if we make our property a long-term rental. We said absolutely and the property has had a long term renter since 2008. My request to the council is our family has a short term rental for many years, back to the 60’s and presently closing in on the end of the 5 year transient rental. Like our community our family was hit hard with COVID and the purpose of this request is to ask for an extension of the 5 year due to COVID we lost 46 days and request that we get an extension on the license to fulfill that. We have made sure our properties adhere to the restrictions in Cannon Beach. We are cordially asking that we get an extension to cover the cancellations. I appreciate your consideration. You have copies of cancelation dates, and they can be verified.

Aaron Matusick via Zoom I have a nightmare – recurring that my house or my neighbor’s house burns down because Marc and his short staffed crew is responding to Indian Beach or some other random emergency or another girl drowns because we don’t have a life guard station set up, or this council accepts ORLA or lobbyist position that this may hurt tips without any documentation. It will tip more and most people that eat out do. We have to go with data when we make decision here. Cannon Beach has an influx of visitors, and we are no longer a village and need to support the fire department and police. Let’s get some lifeguard stations to lessen their duty to respond to state parks and other lifeguard type emergencies. I ask that you have a second reading of the ordinance and attempt to pass it here tonight without putting it to a vote if that is possible. If not, please no delays let’s get it on the ballot for November.

Darryl Komesu via zoom PO Box 172 Tolovana Park Komesu presented a PowerPoint presentation which is included in the record.

PUBLIC HEARING & ORDINANCE

( 2) Public Hearing on ZO 21-01 Haystack Rock LLC Request for Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments and Consideration of Ordinance 21-05 for the Purpose of Amending Chapter 42, Oceanfront Management Overlay (OM) Zone and 43, Wetlands Overlay (WO) Zone and 71, Stream Corridor Protections of Title 17 Zoning of the Cannon Beach Municipal Code

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council, August 3, 2021 Page 3 of 10 This is a hearing requested by Will Rasmussen on behalf of Haystack Rock LLC, for a zoning ordinance text amendment regarding notice and procedural requirements for development and conditional use permitting when extending access and utilization of public rights-of-way located in oceanfront management, stream corridor and wetland overlay areas.

No one objected to the jurisdiction of the City Council to hear this appeal at this time. Mayor Steidel asked if any Councilor had personal bias to declare. There were none. Mayor Steidel asked if any Councilors had any conflict of interest. There were none. Mayor Steidel asked if any Councilor had any ex parte contacts to declare. There were none. The commissioners declared their site visits.

Mayor Steidel asked if there was any additional correspondence, Adams replied, Mr. Stamp requested audio files be considered which were posted to the meting page and forwarded to Council.

Adams summarized the staff report. Adams reviewed the proposed amendments adding Mr. Stamp, on behalf of Roberts, asked that all audio files be included in the record. We included all the minutes in the record and everything we have done since COVID has been live via Zoom and are all online and can be accessed through website, we have been doing audio for years.

In response to Ogilvie’s question on number 3 you say it was blocked for a period of one year. I take that to mean for some reason there is a road that was blocked, Adams replied I think we can clarify if you like and my assumption is there is a road there, and it has not been in use for a year and we can clarify that. Ogilvie added 6th Street was put in at the time the north end entrance was being reconfigured and it was blocked for a number of years. How would that have affected if the road got opened or not? Adams replied we can let the applicant speak to that, as they are the ones who brought the application forward. Rasmussen replied: 6th Street isn’t in wetland or stream buffer so it wouldn’t have an impact, noting a few examples. Most streets in town do not go through wetlands or one of these areas. If they did, there will be a notice.

The request will be reviewed against the criteria of the Municipal Code, Section 17.86.070.A, Amendments, Criteria.

The pertinent criteria to be considered are noted in the staff reports. Testimony, arguments and evidence must be directed toward those criteria or other criteria in the Comprehensive Plan or Municipal Code which the person testifying believes to apply to the decision. Failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal based on that issue. Prior to the conclusion of the initial evidentiary hearing, any participant may request an opportunity to present additional testimony, arguments or evidence regarding the application. City Council shall grant such requests by continuing the public hearing or leaving the record open for additional written testimony, arguments or evidence. Persons who testify shall first receive recognition from the Mayor, state their full name and mailing address, and if appearing in a representative capacity, identify whom they represent.

Is there a presentation by the applicant? Will Rasmussen, Miller Nash LLP on behalf of Haystack rock LLC, the entity that owns the Oswald West Cabin. Rasmussen stated this applications fills a hole in the code. It came from an application that got citizens interested last year. Staff put together a map of sensitive lands and overlayed the handful areas that would be affected and that is in the current packet. As for what it was meant by blocked, if there was a road or trail that hasn’t been used for a period of time how long does that need to exist before being established with a condition use. Currently there is no process regarding running roads through sensitive areas, giving examples. The comp plan calls to preserve wetlands, streams and discourage development in oceanfront overlay. Currently you can get an application for a giant bridge or 1-5 segment through a sensitive area and there is no mechanism to review. Other jurisdictions have a process in place. What’s in front of you is a compromise with staff to give some notice for these types of applications and is less burdensome to staff. my client just wants notice for these types of applications. The Planning Commission agreed to have a process of these types of applications. It’s pretty simple.

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council August 3, 2021 Page 4 of 10 Are there presentations by proponents?

Lisa Kerr – PO Box 94 I am not a proponent or opponent. I just have a concern about the way it is worded. I support the intent of the text amendments but am here to request table voting on the amendments until we have further discussion. I feel bad that I didn’t notice this sooner. What concerns me, I initially thought the amendments would enhance the protections, but concerned now that reading the full text they may instead increase the permissible uses. Kerr called out 17.71.040 saying this speaks to permitted uses within the zone right now. None of those say driveways. If driveways were considered as part of the language, it should have said including but not limited to. In other words, the way it is written there is no red line through driveways. But under A has reviews in this zone subject to a conditional use permit. It seems like its enhancing what can happen with a conditional use in this zone where before it did not list driveway or expansion of existing rights-of-way. The way it is written needs to be changed unless we are trying to enhance the list of things that are permissible and my understanding was that was not the intent. I thought I understood the intent, but it is unclear and too ambiguous to accomplish the city’s mission. Kerr noted concerns in the wetland section on page 3. I am asking this get sent back to Planning Commission to look again at wording to decide what we are trying to accomplish and if this wording accomplishes it. I feel bad and feel like I dropped the ball. I want a chance to see if there are fixes, we can make to accomplish what we want to accomplish. We have to be careful on how we approach these things and have airtight ordinances. Let’s hold off and look at it one more time.

Are there presentations by opponents?

Andrew Stamp, 4248 Galewood Street, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Stamp stated I am here on behalf of Stan and Becky Roberts, noting the location. Frankly it’s the reason this proposal was submitted by Haystack. Its disingenuous to say they have any other purpose other than stopping the Roberts from building, noting examples. I spent 10 hours looking at maps on the city website and Clatsop County GIS and have not found one other property where access has more than 50 ft of OM zone ROW that would need to be improved to build a house in an OM zone. That tells me this is pretty targeted and its bad policy for City Council to act on a policy from one home owner trying to stop the neighboring landowner to stop building. Council should think hard about that, the perception would be bad. I would like to ask for a continuance. I am heartened to hear a Planning Commissioner member has second thoughts. The language could be improved drastically, but for different reason. Focus on conditional use criteria, giving examples. If Council, from a policy standpoint, thinks it’s a good idea to regulate driveways and ROWs in sensitive areas, would be better rather than relying on conditional use criteria to develop their own, noting examples. These criteria would not regulate anything. There are two that kinda, sorta, have some relevance giving examples. Stamp added some are a public works/engineering issue to determine what is adequate for a driveway and not sure why elevate that to a planning commission issue. If you are going to regulate driveways and roads in the wetland you should have criteria that accomplish something. Differential between good and bad locations. I only identified 22 properties that are currently vacant and where this proposed ordinance would trigger a conditional use. I question the idea that this is legislative, and I don’t think that there is a whole lot of people that are affected by this and those that are should have been given individual notice. Another thing – just heard testimony that the finances are not that good. Whenever talking about conditional use and denying access to a lot that gets you into a Lucas vs S Carolina Coastal Commission area giving examples of a taking situation case. The Roberts lot is listed at $900,000 on Clatsop County. if you deny the Roberts access to the lot you have to buy that lot. Rasmussen would think that’s a great idea since no one would build next to their property and the city gets stuck with the bill. You are regulating with a Conditional Use and that is something the city should consider. We think the idea is bad and there is not a pressing need to regulate wetlands from a land use standpoint. They are regulated by the state and has to go through their process. don’t think this is needed and is not needed on the Roberts property. I hope you give carefully consideration instead of adopting tonight.

Jan Siebert Wahrmund PO Box 778 I am concerned. I was going to speak through Zoom and during Darryl it went dead. I couldn’t hear anything and luckily I was able to get a ride here tonight and am very concerned. Hope no one else was left in a lurch. Speaking

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council, August 3, 2021 Page 5 of 10 on behalf of Board of Directors for Ecola Creek Awareness project. Dear Mayor and City Council, considered in section 17.42.030 where it now lists uses and activities in ocean from management neither road driveways or expansion of rights-of-way are listed permitted uses. Therefore the new proposal to amend the zone to allow roads, driveway’s and expanded ROW as a conditional use would be an increase in use of what is legally allowed in the OM zone and should be analyzed in depth before being amended. It is our understanding that the stream coordinator buffer we have now do no permit driveways or expansion in the ROW unlike in the wetland zone. Expansion of existing ROW would be inappropriate in the stream coordinator protection buffer. It could result in significant ecological damage. I ask City Council to address these concerns about expanding allowed usage before voting and table until an analysis is completed. We want the best protection for all of these sensitive lands.

Is there a staff response?

Adams on increased use, the only reason written was to protect and if an item was not listed there I wish I could say it is prohibited but you can go down the ordinance that protects different things. It is not clear, if we put in the zoning ordinance that something is prohibited it is prohibited. You can pick and choose in certain things, and Mr. Stamp brought up a great point, we don’t deny people access to their property. This is to give clear definition that these would go to Planning Commission to get conditions. We can work on the language, and it can be better, every ordinance can be. Whether Mr. Stamp’s notation of specific criteria, I read through some that apply and do not apply. I would be happy to see what Mr. Stamp offers as a better suggestion for criteria. The ones I’ve seen are similar in other areas. There are other ways to slice and dice and I appreciate the comments from both sides. What’s brought up about OC management not having strike throughs means you can do a new road, that does not mean that. This gives opportunity for someone to come in and file a ROW permit with no public input. The ones with strikethrough in wetland it would come for a development permit which just comes through me. Written for the intent to come before you, not to increase them. There are enough to be concerned with, there are two developments in the last month that came before that this would apply to. There is no rush to put any of this through. I’ve suggested since the beginning that this could be a part of the code audit and I am happy to work with language to clarify. This is a positive step froward. With the code audit and ZO in Planning in September, these are like a pilot project.

Does the applicant or proponents wish to make additional statements?

Rasmussen noted regarding the comments made, addressing Kerr’s concerns adding there is ambiguity on what is allowed right now. Having no process, which is why my client thought it was important, is really problematic. Mr Stamp wants to table now because there isn’t a land use process and it’s just considered internally, noting concerns with the current process. The conditional use process is the logical way to address it. Regarding Mr. Stamp, some might not fit great but a lot of them do, noting the benefits of the criteria and new policy. There is an urgency to this. You heard the Planning director say there are three proposals being considered and if a process is not selected you will end up with lawyers arguing through this. I was surprised for find out Cannon Beach didn’t have land use process for sensitive areas.

Steidel closed the public hearing and moved to consideration

McCarthy stated as I understand, what we have now is the ability to put a road or driveway or some access to property in the three different zones. It could be an outright use and no one is being notified. The proposal is it comes in as a conditional use and there is more criteria reviewed for access to property and there be a public notice and go before Planning Commission for consideration. Adams replied yes. In response to McCarthy’s question, it’s not permitting outright, its putting conditions if allowed, Adams replied yes, and everyone would have to go to Planning Commission. They are not going to just not look at the comp plan and criteria, they will thoroughly review it. I understand Kerr, they live this this stuff, and I think this does that. It would give Planning Commission the ability to say if topo or soil concerns in the comp plan listed in the ordinance that guide our direction for land development where before just because it wasn’t strike through. Currently we don’t have that. The strikethrough areas were for a development permit and would go through me. With this they would go to

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council August 3, 2021 Page 6 of 10 Planning Commission giving examples. The language could be better but have another shot at it when you go through code audit.

Benefield stated it seems like now without adopting the ordinance any platted ROW through wetland or sensitive area except for your willingness to stand up and be challenged by the applicant and you don’t have a basis for it other than your personal feeling. This provision will have to go through Planning Commission and then it gets full public airing and notification with than an administrative function that could be challenged.

Ogilvie stated with building pressure there will be pressure to expand city limits or UGB. Adams added I had two calls in the last two weeks and we will be seeing that and I talked with Bruce to say we need to discuss UGB and annexation, they are going to happen and we will bring to you guys for discussion.

Risley stated what Lisa brought up, it doesn’t say anything about driveways, can that be put in? Adams replied it now says driveways and it didn’t before. That’s what I want to clarify, driveways are included now. She inferred that because it was left out of permitted uses, we are allowing it in this area. Just because it’s not mentioned doesn’t mean its prohibited. Noted examples of what is prohibited.

Steidel stated do we want to move forward with text that is presented or send back to Planning Commission to tweak. Risley replied I would like to see that. Steidel noted I am not hearing anyone say they are strongly opposed. McCarthy replied I would be curious to see what Planning Commission would consider and how the language would be tweaked form the current state. Benefield added the previous language under permitted outright in wetland buffer has been removed. Lisa is saying they want that to be another section that says these are things not allowed, and it would have to go to Planning Commission for consideration. It seems to me that it is covered quite well by removing drivers from a sensitive area. Steidel noted I appreciate what Adams is saying about the code audit to readdress anything that may be awkward. I have no problem either way. Benefield replied I would rather move forward and have these protections in place and recognize there are some tweaks or experiences that may need to make adjustments. Right now, Adams has no recourse except our basic standards. Steidel added the Planning Commission using the conditional use they have the ability to suggest outside what the developer is presenting so the conditional use gives you that kind of added flexibility. Adams added its very similar like prioritization process. Benefield noted I am in favor and willing to make a motion. McCarthy replied I am in favor of going ahead and see conditions put in place, we have such a demand in the area and are seeing proposals in the wetlands and we have no way of discussing and reviewing it.

Motion: Benefield moved to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 21-05; Ogilvie seconded the motion.

Steidel read Ordinance 21-05 For The Purpose Of Amending Chapter 42, Oceanfront Management Overlay (Om) Zone And 43, Wetlands Overlay (Wo) Zone And 71, Stream Corridor Protections Of Title 17 Zoning Of The Cannon Beach Municipal Code.

Vote: Councilors Benefield, Ogilvie, McCarthy, Risley and Mayor Steidel voted AYE; the vote was 5:0 in favor and the motion passed unanimously.

Motion: Benefield moved to approve the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 21-05; Ogilvie seconded the motion.

Vote: Councilors Benefield, Ogilvie, McCarthy, Risley and Mayor Steidel voted AYE; the vote was 5:0 in favor and the motion passed unanimously.

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council, August 3, 2021 Page 7 of 10 Steidel announced Ordinance No. 21-05 has been adopted and will become effective 30 days from adoption.

RESOLUTIONS

( 3) Consideration of Resolution 21-24 for the Purpose of Approving Changes to the FY 2021-2022 Budget by Increasing Appropriations in the General for HRAP

St. Denis read the staff report. Adding it is a really cool program.

Motion: Ogilvie moved to approve Resolution 21-24 for the Purpose of Approving Changes to the FY 2021-2022 Budget by Increasing Appropriations in the General; Risley seconded the motion.

Vote: Councilors Benefield, Ogilvie, McCarthy, Risley and Mayor Steidel voted AYE; the vote was 5:0 in favor and the motion passed unanimously.

( 4) Consideration of Resolution 21-25 for the Purpose of Calling an Election in the City of Cannon Beach on November 2, 2021 to Impose a Five Percent Tax on the Purchase of Prepared Food

Driscoll reported I went through the details last week, gave an overview of the history and the election process. If council passes the resolution tonight, tomorrow staff will start taking action to move forward giving an overview of the process. In the packet is a copy showing the track changes which were made from the council meeting and since we first published this and to make sure we are still in the word count. Regarding the tax amount raised, we verified the estimated number without beverage is $1.74 M in revenue, noted other revision made. At the council last time had a discussion about one of the exemptions regarding public and private schools, I added that in both copies.

In response to Ogilvie’s question if we were to make the recommendation it would come with the noted changes, Driscoll yes it would be the clean version. Steidel added I read through it and the section you took out of the summary makes it more positive and are still explained in the explanation.

Res 21-25 for the 5% PFT,

Motion: Ogilvie moved to approve Resolution 21-25 for the 5% prepared food tax; Risley seconded the motion.

Benefield stated this huge influx tourist in Cannon Beach proposed a financial burden on city, law enforcement safety security, maintenance, emergency services, etc.. The council has sought a source of revenue that doesn’t place the burden on the residents on property taxes. I believe that referring this issue to the voters is an abdication of the Council duties. This motion does not need to go to the voters . We have the ability to reject this resolution and adopt the ordinance which would require another first reading. McCarthy replied I agree with Benefield. City Council was elected to make hard decision and find solutions to the cities problems and ensure safety. By asking the voters to make our decisions for us we are taking a gamble. We should step up and do the job we are supposed to do. We should enact an ordinance for a food tax and that’s why we ran. I may vote, I am not sure yet, only because I know we need to have a tax and if so, so be it. Benefield added I have been in opposition of this process all along. Steidel noted I agree we are here as a council to represent the community, to make decisions and it’s a form of leadership to me that when the decision is substantial it’s a better form of representation. Benefield replied if this was a tax on the residents, the voters, I would agree with you but it’s not. Steidel added but it does affect them, noting examples. The more honest way is to go forward with the vote.

Vote: Councilors Ogilvie, Risley and Mayor Steidel voted AYE; Councilors Benefield and McCarthy

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council August 3, 2021 Page 8 of 10 voted NAY; the vote was 3:2 in favor and the motion passed.

Motion passes and we will move forward with the process.

ACTION ITEMS

( 5) Consideration of Parks and Community Services Committee Community Grant Award Recommendations for FY 2021-22

St. Denis summarized the staff report. Sorenson gave an update based on the last council meeting and the feedback received adding we plan to move forward and identified some of the elements to review and discus further. At last meeting there was the possibility to have a committee meeting with Council and there was real interest in that in the fall once we have a proposal to share and before our application next year. Risley added I listened to the recording and I appreciate all the thought that went into the discussion.

Motion: Ogilvie moved to adopt the FY 2021-2022 Community Grant awards as presented; Risley seconded the motion.

Vote: Councilors Benefield, Ogilvie, McCarthy, Risley and Mayor Steidel voted AYE; the vote was 5:0 in favor and the motion passed unanimously.

( 6) Consideration of Adopting the Tourism and Arts Fund Award Recommendations for FY 2021-22

St. Denis summarized the staff report. In response to Ogilvie’s comment it was explained to me a revision has been made to the original recommendation, J Barrett gave an overview of the change from the Food Pantry to the Library adding this went through the Committee.

Motion: Ogilvie moved to adopt the FY 2021-22 Tourism & Arts Fund grant awards as presented; Benefield seconded the motion.

Vote: Councilors Benefield, Ogilvie, McCarthy, Risley and Mayor Steidel voted AYE; the vote was 5:0 in favor and the motion passed unanimously.

( 7) Consideration of the Cannon Beach Elementary School Rejuvenation Project Roof Repair Award

La Bonte read the staff report. Steidel noted this is the just for the classroom building, we are reconsidering the gym for next spring. Why is the insulation necessary for the gym? La Bonte replied it’s that particular type of insulation and we are just not able to get it, a discussion ensued. St. Denis added we will bring back answers to your questions. In the meantime would like to approve work in the classrooms which does include the seismic component so we do not need to do it later. A discussion ensued regarding insulation and the condition of the gym roof. In Response to McCarthy’s question why was Eagle Mountain construction bid was so high, La Bonte replied ZCS called them and not sure if it was just an error as originally it was the two buildings then revised to one, we were all surprised.

Sam asked for permission to make a motion, Ogilvie approved.

Motion: Steidel moved approve the contract award to O’Brien & Company for the Cannon Beach Elementary School Roof Replacement Project; Ogilive seconded the motion.

Vote: Councilors Benefield, Ogilvie, McCarthy, Risley and Mayor Steidel voted AYE; the vote was 5:0 in favor and the motion passed unanimously.

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council, August 3, 2021 Page 9 of 10 ( 8) Wastewater Reserve FY 21-22 Budget Project Revision

La Bonte read the staff report. Council agreed with the revision. Steidel added go for it.

( 9) Request to Change Manager Contract from a City Provided Vehicle to a Vehicle Allowance

Driscoll reported I am pulling this agenda item and represent to Council. I would like to talk to St. Denis about the best way to go about modifying the contract. I have a recommendation on how to handle and St. Denis doesn’t need the modification ASAP, so there is no action at this time.

INFORMATIONAL/OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS

(10) Monthly Status Report

(11) Mayor Communications

Steidel noted I will be attending the prom dedication. Risley replied I will be there too.

(12) Councilor Communications

(13) Good of the Order In response to Ogilvie’s question in light of passing of the ordinance do you anticipate in having additional meetings, Driscoll replied the resolution will now be referred to the county. Public employees should start the prohibition on public employees even though it doesn’t kick in until given to the county. Out of an abundance of caution we would like to start now. St. Denis added if you want to have a meeting to discuss something we will, but we are not planning on a meeting in this process. Ogilvie replied I am gone from the 18th to the following Monday, so I wanted to doublecheck.

Steidel asked Rick Hudson you sent texts and emails on Alaska earthquake, you went through warning and how urgent did you feel. Hudson replied it seemed pretty urgent. 8.2 is not something to be messed with. Next week preparing a presentation on what happened an after action and how we would handle it on this end.

ADJORNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.

ATTEST:

______Jennifer Barrett, City Recorder Sam Steidel, Mayor

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council August 3, 2021 Page 10 of 10 Minutes of the CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Tuesday, August 10, 2021 Council Chambers

Present: Mayor Sam Steidel, Council President Mike Benefield, Nancy McCarthy, Robin Risley and Brandon Ogilvie.

Excused: None

Staff: City Manager Bruce St. Denis, Assistant Public Works Director Trevor Mount, Chief of Police Jason Schermerhorn, Community Development Director Jeff Adams, Assistant Finance Director Marni Johnston, Emergency Manager Rick Hudson, Public Works Director Karen La Bonte, and Administrative Assistant Kelsey Balensifer.

CALL TO ORDER AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Mayor Steidel called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

Steidel asked for a motion to approve the agenda.

Motion: Ogilvie moved to approve the agenda as presented; Risley seconded.

Vote: Benefield, McCarthy, Ogilvie, Risley and Steidel voted AYE: the vote was 5:0 and the motion passed unanimously.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Steidel asked for public comment.

Jessi Just from Heart of Cartm was going to read a prepared statement, but she was not present. A copy of her written statement is available in the record.

DISCUSSIONS

( 1) Fireworks Parameters

Schermerhorn summarized his staff report.

He shared that the municipal judge resigned due to the possible $5,000 fine for a sparkler. He pointed out that regular fireworks offenses are a potential $1,000 fine, outside of fire season, but then that fine gets increased automatically if the offense takes place during fire season. Schermerhorn said the only fireworks citations issued this year were four incidents of sparkler use. Benefield said that he always thought that sparklers should be exempt. Steidel said that perhaps the violation level for a hand-held sparkling device could be lowered to level one, but he also agreed with Benefield. McCarthy said it may depend on where a sparkler is being used, as a location like the dune grass would be high risk. Schermerhorn said that in a situation like that, the police could still charge someone with reckless burning, due to the highly flammable location of sparkler use. McCarthy asked for Schermerhorn’s suggestion. He said that something less than $5,000 would be ideal. The judge was able to lower the fine amount, but he did not like seeing the four $5,000 sparkler violations cross his desk. Schermerhorn pointed to 9.16.030 F, the enhancement of the fine by one level due to fire risk. Schermerhorn said that the judge determines the value of the fines, so that the officers are not in a situation of determining the values while in the field issuing tickets.

Steidel asked for clarification on 9.16.030 G, which prevents a fine from being enhanced more than two levels. He pointed out this is not possible. Steidel said he was disturbed that they lost their judge over this. McCarthy said that she did not understand why the judge would have resigned. Ogilvie suggested moving sparklers to level one. McCarthy asked where the “no fireworks” signs were at the entrances to Cannon Beach. Schermerhorn shared the locations of those signs. McCarthy said she did not see them. Steidel asked if Council was comfortable with the dollar amounts. McCarthy said yes, and Risley said that it got the point across.

Steidel said he was surprised that there were only a few large blasts after 4th of July. Benefield asked if the officers had discretion. Schermerhorn said no, it was zero tolerance this year. Schermerhorn said that at least on two or three of the citations, the people cited said they had seen the signs entering town, but did not think that meant sparklers. Benefield asked what the judge had reduced the fines to in court. Schermerhorn shared that the one in January was dropped to $500, with a further reduction to $250 with community service. Schermerhorn said that the officers are given a form to fill out to explain the circumstances around the fireworks violation, such as a dangerous situation, attitude, intoxication, etc. St. Denis said that the City will move forward with hiring a judge, and a prosecutor will serve as the judge pro tem in the judge’s absence. Benefield asked if the judge must be a certified appointed judge. Schermerhorn said that the judge is usually a local attorney for municipal court. St. Denis said that the City can contract with the County to provide municipal court services. Risley asked if it costs more to do that. St. Denis said he is not sure, but he is sure the City is charged for every case. Johnston shared that there is a traveling judge that handles cities like Manzanita that is also an option.

( 2) Review of the Alaska 8.2 Earthquake on July 28th

Hudson summarized his staff report and presented a PowerPoint presentation. A copy of the presentation is in the record file.

Hudson said that on the coast this sort of thing is not usually experienced. Other areas of the country, with tornadoes or hurricanes, this start of stuff is experienced all the time. He said that after the wildfires last year, the whole state adopted the Everbridge system to provide better notifications in the event of an emergency. Hudson summarized what happened in the recent earthquake in Alaska.

Hudson provided some examples of the emergency messaging from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. He shared the language used to get the information out to the public, such as warnings, advisories, watches, and information statements. Hudson pointed out the various time formats used in the notices. The potential impacts and forecasts are generated by buoys out in the water, he said. The notices from the NOAA provide information on the expected arrival time and expected wave height. Bulletins arrive every 30 minutes, on a typical time frame, but may arrive in quicker succession if more things are happening, Hudson said. The log of bulletins can be accessed on the NOAA website, so someone who is late to the game can catch up on the information.

Hudson shared that the City’s old emergency action plan was 400+ pages long, and no one had read it. He said that when McCarthy asked about it a year ago, he started working on updated Emergency Operation Guidelines. These documents are not just for staff, Hudson said, but are also for the public, so the City can show them what staff has been doing. These documents give a basic guideline of who is doing what, Hudson said, and also what is expected from the Emergency Manager.

Hudson shared some information about notable earthquakes in American and world history. McCarthy asked how many people can fit in the Emergency Operation Center at the Public Works yard. Hudson said not many, especially if it is a large event and long-term, and the Coaster Construction building can serve as a backup. Hudson said it is workable.

Minutes - Cannon Beach City Council - August 10, 2021 Page 2 of 5 McCarthy said this is one reason why the City needs an adequate EOC. Hudson agreed. McCarthy asked if the earthquake in 1700 started here and traveled to Asia. Hudson said she was correct. Benefield pointed out that each level of earthquake ranking is 10 times more powerful than the level below it. McCarthy asked about the level of damage from the Alaska quake. Hudson said it was limited, due to the remote area and the depth of the earthquake. St. Denis said that Hudson is great on this type of information.

Benefield said the emergency guideline documents will be helpful.

McCarthy asked how prepared the City is for a natural disaster. Hudson said that it is a loaded question, but the City has the right attitude, even though there is a long way to go. Hudson said that the City has always been mindful about the Cascadia event, but not giving much attention to other types of disasters. The City is much more prepared than it has been in the past, but there’s still a way to go. St. Denis shared that for long-term disasters, he sees the City getting a D or an F, with no facility.

( 3) Camera Locations

Schermerhorn summarized the staff report. He said that one of the things he would like to work on, as part of police transparency, is putting officers at certain intersections in town that have issues. This would not include facial recognition software, but would help an admin monitor the downtown area remotely in the case of a missing child, especially when just one officer is on duty. Schermerhorn gave an example of a sexual assault case that happened downtown last year, after the bars had closed. Schermerhorn would like the camera to be at the skatepark and assist with high liability areas. St. Denis said that there are not a lot of privately owned cameras downtown that the police can use. McCarthy asked, without facial recognition software, how a missing person might be located on a camera. Schermerhorn said they would use clothing, height, hairstyle, etc. Risley asked if Schermerhorn had coordinated with the businesses. He said yes, but many of those cameras point inside the stores only, not onto the street. Schermerhorn said it would be live, so an officer could check on a situation remotely. St. Denis said the quality of the images is much better than what may be seen in stores.

St. Denis asked if Council was comfortable with installing these cameras downtown. Ogilvie asked where these cameras would be located. Schermerhorn said they would need to be on City-owned poles. Ogilvie asked if the City would be willing to work with private pole owners. Schermerhorn said that it would be something they might need to run by legal. St. Denis said that the City already works with the power company and utility companies to use their poles in certain situations. Steidel said that he would like to see general locations, but not specifics, and that he has no problem with it. Risley asked how many cameras would be needed. Schermerhorn said maybe four or so.

( 4) TSP Monthly Update

Adams summarized the staff report and presented a PowerPoint presentation. A copy is in the record file.

Adams said that the date for the next round of public meetings will be in September. He will have all of the data on the website, so anyone can browse through it. Adams said the parking survey came about because they got so much feedback on parking from the transportation survey.

He gave a brief overview of the highlights of the parking survey. Adams said that he was amazed at the positive responses people gave to the survey. The respondents appreciated being asked, Adams said, and had good ideas for solutions. He encouraged people to visit cannonbeachtsp.com.

McCarthy said that it was ironic that people who took the survey seemed to be in support of paid parking, when many people came in person to complain about possible paid parking. Adams said that surveys are good at reaching people who may not be the same people who attend a Council meeting. The Council expressed their

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council, August 3, 2021 Page 3 of 5 appreciation to Adams.

( 5) CBE Construction Delivery Proposal

St. Denis said Council provided a consensus on this topic at a past meeting. However, he talked to the City attorney about this, and she clarified that the Council has to provide specific direction for which contracting model to utilize and adopt a resolution.

St. Denis summarized the staff report and presented a PowerPoint presentation. A copy is in the record file. St. Denis said that the public hearing on this topic will likely be scheduled for September 7, 2021.

McCarthy asked how much control or oversight the City has in terms of the fees paid to the designer and the contractor. St. Denis clarified that the City would negotiate these fees with both parties.

Ogilvie said that his concerns remain the same: the buildings are very old and it is very likely that the costs will be much higher than anticipated. He asked how that would be addressed in the model that St. Denis recommends. St. Denis said that having a contractor there will help with that, as the contractor will help catch anticipated cost increases early, such as during the design phase, instead of having those cost increases come as a surprise when bids are submitted. He also pointed out that in the time since the cost study was conducted, costs have gone up, and the cost should be expected to total more than $3.7 million. There is a guaranteed maximum price provided by the contractor, he said, with some caveats. But that CM/GC would not benefit from increased costs because their fee has already been set, St. Denis said. He said the model he recommends offers more control and having a contractor onsite will provide added perspective on any issues, more than working directly with a design firm. Ogilvie said he agrees, but he does not believe that hiring someone to provide a fixed bid is necessarily the best way to go. St. Denis said that contracts will address that, but the CM/CG has already agreed on their price, so they do not want to spend extra time on-site with change orders or work delays. Ogilvie said that is kind of his concern, because he foresees a lot of change orders, due to the age of the buildings, and he fears that someone would try to rush through that if they were in a position to have to work within the set parameters of their fee. St. Denis said that there is a significant contingency factored into the estimate, but both buildings were also torn apart to get an accurate assessment of their condition.

Steidel clarified that the CM/GC is for a set period of time. St. Denis agreed and said that there is a period from the time they start to when they do the bids, and then a second period for the construction. Steidel said that the design parameters would establish the timeline for the second period. St. Denis said that he has been involved in a situation like this four times in the past, and he has not encountered that situation. Steidel said the current roofing material shortage for a gym is a good example. St. Denis said that the design team could recommend alternatives, or portions of the project can be delayed, like the roof situation. Steidel said he is worried about getting someone from outside the area for a set amount of time, and then they are gone, while the City is left dealing with delays. Ogilvie said that is something that could be negotiated. St. Denis said they would be contractually obligated to finish the project. Benefield clarified that there would be bonds in place for that kind of scenario. Benefield said he sees it taking twice as long and costing twice as much. St. Denis said he sees it being more than $3.7 million, but he is not sure how much. St. Denis said the construction itself is actually simple for this building. Benefield agreed, since it is not a complex structure, but the CM/GC model will not solve all the City’s problems.

( 6) Funding of Receptionist/Court Clerk in Finance Department

St. Denis summarized the staff report.

Benefield asked if it would be a full-time position. St. Denis said it would be, and it would be the lowest paid position in the SEIU structure. Ogilvie asked if the projected amount includes the City’s contribution to PERS. St. Denis said yes.

Minutes - Cannon Beach City Council - August 10, 2021 Page 4 of 5

Risley asked what would happen if the restaurant tax does not pass. St. Denis said that this person would still be needed, even without the prepared food tax. Ogilvie asked if we are already at the point of needing another person now. St. Denis said we are. Benefield said that nearly every time he walks into City Hall, there is someone being helped at the counter, and he is not sure how the finance department gets anything done. Risley said that it is a distraction, and the reception position is needed. Benefield asked where the funds would come from. St. Denis said that he believes Finance Director Laurie Sawrey is going to use contingency funds. The budget adjustment will be brought to the September 7 meeting.

( 7) Good of the Order

Steidel asked about the scope of work for the Cannon Beach Elementary project. St. Denis said that the City is working with the City attorney, and they have these type of contract documents available. Once the CM/CG decision is made, it should be quick, St. Denis said.

Risley asked about the service suspension of the bus. St. Denis said they are short on drivers. Ogilvie asked which route was cut. St. Denis said it was 17. Kathy Kleczek from Sunset Empire Transportation District was on Zoom. The driver shortage is affecting all the routes, she said, and operations makes the decisions as to which routes are reduced or the way in which the shortage is going to affect certain routes/service. Route 17 goes through most of Cannon Beach and then does stops in Seaside, she said. Steidel said that this is the route that had been using the trolley. Kleczek confirmed that.

McCarthy asked about how the City can prevent the situation with the Sea Breeze. St. Denis said that it was unfortunate, and he does not remember another situation like this happening recently. St. Denis said that it was a small, low-impact project, which was why there was not a heavy notification process. St. Denis said he has been very impressed with how proactive the City staff is on items like this, especially Public Works. McCarthy said the problem was compounded by other issues, such as the influx of summer tourists and the Farmer’s Market parking.

St. Denis said the code audit firm, Urbsworks, asked to talk with a couple members of each board or committee, prior to the upcoming meetings in early September. Benefield, McCarthy and Steidel will be the three. That conversation will happen in a week or two, St. Denis said. The large meetings with the involved parties and Urbsworks will happen in early September and the end of August, depending on everyone’s availability.

McCarthy asked if members of Council would be interested in submitting a statement to the voters’ pamphlet for the prepared food tax. The deadline is September 7, and it would cost about $200, she said. Ogilvie said that he is interested in joining in that. Steidel may be interested, but he wants to see the text. Risley does not know yet. Benefield said he is not sure what he has to say that has not already been said. Benefield is a maybe. Ogilvie recommended sending it to the City attorney and asking whether McCarthy could send it out to all the Councilors.

McCarthy reminded everyone that Coffee with a Councilor is coming up on Monday.

Risley asked about masks indoors. More details will be forthcoming from the Governor tomorrow, Steidel said.

ADJORNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 8:02 p.m.

ATTEST:

______Kelsey Balensifer, Administrative Assistant Sam Steidel, Mayor

Minutes, Cannon Beach City Council, August 3, 2021 Page 5 of 5 CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 21-06 FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 9.16.030 VIOLATION – PENALTY LEVELS ______

Agenda Date: September 7, 2021 Prepared by: Jason Schermerhorn, Chief of Police

BACKGROUND

Council adopted Ordinance 20-18 on September 1, 2020 prohibiting fireworks within the City limits.

ANALYSIS/INFORMATION

As this was the first year of the ban, Council held discussions on the number and types of tickets issued after New Year’s Eve and the 4th of July. Based on these discussions, at the August 10th work session, Council requested the fee level of handheld sparking devices be moved to a level one violation.

An additional revision is recommended. The word possessing was removed from section 9.16.010. By leaving it in, anyone possessing Oregon legal fireworks are at risk of being in violation of the Ordinance.

Exhibit A contains Ordinance 21-06 which makes these adjustments.

RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends Council adopt Ordinance 21-06.

Recommended motions:

“I move to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 21-06”

“I move to approve the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 21-06”

List of Attachments A Ordinance 21-06 B Marked up revision to municipal code

{00770328; 1 }PO Box 368 Cannon Beach, Oregon 97110 • (503) 436-1581 • TTY (503) 436-8097 • FAX (503) 436-2050 www.ci.cannon-beach.or.us • [email protected] Attachment A

BEFORE THE COMMON COUNCIL OF CANNON BEACH

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL ) ORDINANCE NO. 21-06 CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER 9.16 FIREWORKS ) PROHIBITED )

WHEREAS, Council adopted Ordinance 20-18 on September 1, 2020 prohibiting fireworks within the City limits; and

WHEREAS, after reviewing the number and types of tickets issued on December 31, 2020 and July 4, 2021 Council desires to revise Chapter 9.16; and

WHEREAS, Council has determined that the violation level for handheld sparkling devices should be reduced to a level one violation under Section 9.16.030; and

WHEREAS, Council has decided not to prohibit possession of fireworks within the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CANNON BEACH ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

1. The Cannon Beach City Council amends Chapter 9.16 of the Cannon Beach Municipal Code as described in Exhibit A to this ordinance.

2. This ordinance is effective 30 days after adoption.

ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Cannon Beach this 7th day of September 2021, by the following roll call vote:

YEAS: NAYS: EXCUSED:

______Sam Steidel, Mayor

Attest: Approved as to Form

______Bruce St. Denis, City Manager Ashley Driscoll, City Attorney

{00770920; 3 } Exhibit A

Chapter 9.16 FIREWORKS PROHIBITED

9.16.010 Fireworks prohibited within Cannon Beach city limits. Discharging, or causing to be discharged, any fireworks is prohibited within Cannon Beach city limits, without the written permission of the Oregon State Parks and Recreation Department manager of the beach area in which the permittee wishes to discharge such devices. (Ord. 20-18 § 1)

9.16.020 Definitions. Definitions used in this chapter have the following meanings: “Enhance” means the maximum fine for the violation is increased one level per enhancement. “Fireworks” means any combustible or explosive composition or substance, or any combination of such compositions or substances, or any article which was prepared for the purpose of providing a visible or audible effect by combustion, explosion, deflagration or detonation, and includes blank cartridges or toy cannons in which explosives are used, balloons which require fire underneath to propel the same, firecrackers, torpedoes, sky-rockets, Roman candles, bombs, rockets, wheels, colored fires, fountains, mines, serpents or any other article of like construction or any article containing any explosive or inflammable compound, or any tables or other device containing any explosive substances or inflammable compound and includes, but is not limited to, the following: A. Ground and Hand-Held Sparkling Devices: 1. Dipped Stick Sparkler. Stick or wire coated with pyrotechnic composition that produces a shower of sparks upon ignition. Total pyrotechnic composition may not exceed five grams of pyrotechnic composition per item. Note: wire sparklers that contain no magnesium, less than one hundred grams of composition per and are less than ten inches in length are considered novelties in subsection E below. 2. Cylindrical Fountain. Cylindrical tube not more than three quarters of an inch (19mm) inside diameter, containing up to seventy-five grams of pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition, a shower of colored sparks, and sometimes a whistling effect, is produced. This device may be provided with a spike for insertion into the ground (spike fountain), a wood or plastic base for placing on the ground (base fountain), or a wood or cardboard handle, if intended to be hand-held (handle fountain). 3. Cone Fountain. Cardboard or heavy paper cone containing up to fifty grams of pyrotechnic composition. The effect is the same as that of a cylindrical fountain. 4. Illuminating Torch. Cylindrical tube containing up to one hundred grams of pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition, colored fire is produced. May be spike, base or hand-held. 5. Wheel. Pyrotechnic device attached to a post or tree by means of a nail or string. Each wheel may contain up to six inch driver units: Tubes not exceeding one-half inch (12.7 mm) inside diameter and containing up to sixty grams of pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition, the wheel revolves, producing a shower of color and sparks and sometimes a whistling effect. 6. Ground Spinner. Small device similar to a wheel in design and effect and placed on a ground and ignited. A shower of sparks and color is produced by the rapidly spinning device. 7. Flitter Sparkler. Narrow paper tube filled with pyrotechnic composition that produces color and sparks upon ignition. This device does not have a fuse for ignition. The paper at one end of the tube is ignited to make the device function.

{00771527; 1 } B. Aerial Devices: 1. Sky Rocket (Stick Rockets). Tube not exceeding one-half inch (12.7 mm) inside diameter that may contain up to twenty grams of pyrotechnic composition. Sky rockets contain a wooden stick for guidance and stability and rise into the air upon ignition. A burst of color or noise or both is produced at the height of the light. 2. Missile-Type Rocket. A device similar to a sky rocket in size, composition, and effect that uses fins rather than a stick for guidance and stability. 3. Helicopter, Aerial Spinner. A tube not more than one-half inch (12.7 mm) inside diameter and containing up to twenty grams of pyrotechnic composition. A propeller or blade is attached, which upon ignition, lifts the rapidly spinning device into the air. A visible or audible effect is produced at the height of flight. 4. Roman Candles. Heavy paper or cardboard tube not exceeding three-eighths inch (9.5 mm) inside diameter and containing up to twenty grams of pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition, up to ten “stars” (pellets of pressed pyrotechnic composition that burn with bright color) are individually expelled at several-second intervals. 5. Mine Shell. Heavy cardboard or paper tube up to two and one-half inch (63.5 mm) inside diameter attached to a wood or plastic base and containing up to forty grams of pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition, “stars,” firecrackers, or other devices are propelled into the air. The tube remains on the ground. C. Audible Ground Devices. 1. Firecracker. Small paper-wrapped or cardboard tube containing not more than one hundred thirty milligrams of pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition, noise and flash of light are produced. 2. Chaser. Small paper or cardboard tube that travels along the ground upon ignition. A whistling effect, or other noise, often is produced. The explosive composition used to create the noise may not exceed fifty milligrams. D. Combination Items. Fireworks devices containing combinations of two or more of the effects described in subsections A, B and C of this section. E. Novelties and Trick Noisemakers. 1. Snake, Glow Worm. Pressed pellet of pyrotechnic composition that produces a large, snake-like ash upon burning. The ash expands in length as the pellet burns. These devices may not contain mercuric thiocyanate. 2. Smoke Device. Tube or sphere containing pyrotechnic composition that, upon ignition, produces white or colored smoke as the primary effect. 3. Trick Noisemaker. Item that produces a small report intended to surprise the user. These devices include: a. Party Popper. Small plastic or paper item containing not more than sixteen milligrams of explosive composition that is friction-sensitive. A string protruding from the device is pulled to ignite it, expelling paper streams and producing a small report. b. Booby Trap. Small tube with string protruding from both ends, similar to party popper in design. The ends of the string are pulled to ignite the friction-sensitive composition, producing a small report. c. Trick Match. Kitchen or book match that has been coated with a small quantity of explosive or pyrotechnic composition. Upon ignition of the match, a small report or a shower of sparks is produced.

{00771527; 1 } d. Cigarette Load. Small wooden peg that has been coated with a small quantity of explosive composition. Upon ignition of a cigarette containing one of the pegs, a small report is produced. e. Auto Burglar Alarm. Tube that contains pyrotechnic composition that produces a loud whistle and/or smoke when ignited. A small quantity of explosive, not exceeding fifty milligrams, also may be used to ignite the device. f. Snapper. Small paper-wrapped item containing a minute quantity of explosive composition coated on small bits of sand. When dropped, the device explodes, producing a small report. (Ord. 20-18 § 1)

9.16.030 Violation—Penalty levels. In addition to other penalties provided by law, a violation of this chapter is punishable by a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars depending on the type of the firework and the fire threat in the city at the time of the violation. A. Level One Violation. Discharging or causing to be discharged any novelties or trick noisemaker, handheld sparkling device, or similar firework is punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars unless enhanced. B. Level Two Violation. Discharging or causing to be discharged any ground device, audible ground device, or any similar firework is punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars unless enhanced. C. Level Three Violation. Discharging or causing to be discharged any aerial device or similar firework is punishable by a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars. D. Discharging or causing to be discharged any combination item is punishable by a fine not to exceed the maximum fine of the most severe grade of firework in the combination item, unless the fine is enhanced. E. A violation of this chapter where the size, pyrotechnic composition, or explosive composition of the firework exceeds the maximum size or amount described in the definition enhances the fine one level, not to exceed five thousand dollars. F. A violation of this chapter during fire season as declared by the Oregon Department of Forestry and/or Clatsop County Fire Defense Board, during a fire weather warning as declared by the National Weather Service, or during a high fire threat as declared by another agency with special fire authority or knowledge, enhances the fine one level, not to exceed five thousand dollars. G. A violation may be enhanced no more than two levels. H. Each firework discharge or causing to be discharged is a separate violation. (Ord. 20-18 § 1)

{00771527; 1 } Attachment B

Chapter 9.16 FIREWORKS PROHIBITED

9.16.010 Fireworks prohibited within Cannon Beach city limits. Possessing, dDischarging, or causing to be discharged, any fireworks is prohibited within Cannon Beach city limits, without the written permission of the Oregon State Parks and Recreation Department manager of the beach area in which the permittee wishes to discharge such devices. (Ord. 20-18 § 1)

9.16.030 Violation—Penalty levels. In addition to other penalties provided by law, a violation of this chapter is punishable by a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars depending on the type of the firework and the fire threat in the city at the time of the violation. A. Level One Violation. Discharging or causing to be discharged any novelties or trick noisemaker, handheld sparkling device, or similar firework is punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred dollars unless enhanced. B. Level Two Violation. Discharging or causing to be discharged any ground or handheld sparkling device, audible ground device, or any similar firework is punishable by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars unless enhanced. C. Level Three Violation. Discharging or causing to be discharged any aerial device or similar firework is punishable by a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars. D. Discharging or causing to be discharged any combination item is punishable by a fine not to exceed the maximum fine of the most severe grade of firework in the combination item, unless the fine is enhanced. E. A violation of this chapter where the size, pyrotechnic composition, or explosive composition of the firework exceeds the maximum size or amount described in the definition enhances the fine one level, not to exceed five thousand dollars. F. A violation of this chapter during fire season as declared by the Oregon Department of Forestry and/or Clatsop County Fire Defense Board, during a fire weather warning as declared by the National Weather Service, or during a high fire threat as declared by another agency with special fire authority or knowledge, enhances the fine one level, not to exceed five thousand dollars. G. A violation may be enhanced no more than two levels. H. Each firework discharge or causing to be discharged is a separate violation. (Ord. 20-18 § 1)

{00771527; 1 } CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 21-27 FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROVING INCREASES AND DECREASES TO THE FY 2021-2022 BUDGET BY MAKING AN INTRAFUND TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATIONS ______

Agenda Date: September 7, 2021 Prepared by: Jason Schermerhorn, Chief of Police

BACKGROUND

In an ongoing effort to help combat graffiti, theft and/or destruction of City property cameras will be added at City assets or high accident/incident intersections.

ANALYSIS/INFORMATION

As discussed at the August 10th works session, Attachment B lists the location of each camera. A total of 33 new cameras will be installed with the cost split between the departments using them. The cost for these cameras includes a 10-year camera license. The license covers all maintenance of the cameras including replacement of failed/broken devices and 30-day storage of all footage to the cloud. The cameras allow public works, the police department & emergency management to monitor sites and assets remotely including motion notifications after hours.

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt resolution 21-27.

Suggested motion:

“I move to Adopt Resolution 21-27 for the Purpose of Approving Increases and Decreases to the FY 2021-2022 Budget by Making an Intrafund Transfer of Appropriations.”

List of Attachments A Draft Resolution 21-27 B List of Camera Locations

PO Box 368 Cannon Beach, Oregon 97110 • (503) 436-1581 • TTY (503) 436-8097 • FAX (503) 436-2050 www.ci.cannon-beach.or.us • [email protected] Attachment A BEFORE THE CITY OF CANNON BEACH

FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROVING INCREASES ) RESOLUTION NO. 21-27 AND DECREASES TO THE FY 2021-2022 BUDGET ) BY MAKING AN INTRAFUND TRANSFER OF AP- ) PROPRIATIONS )

WHEREAS, the city wishes to install security cameras on city assets; and

WHEREAS, security cameras will help combat graffiti, theft, and/or destruction of city property; and

WHEREAS, cameras at intersections will assist police in their response to incidents; and

WHEREAS, costs will be allocated among departments that benefit from the increased security; and

WHEREAS, contingency will be used to amend the General Fund, Road Fund, Wastewater Fund, Water Fund, and Recycle Fund budgets as they have the benefiting assets. This will increase expenditures throughout those funds in the amount of $64,850; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of Cannon Beach hereby adopts the following FY 2021-2022 budget changes to the Executive Department of the General Fund.

General Fund Adopted Budget Changes Amended Budget Executive $ 1,076,710 7,500 $ 1,084,210 Community Development 647,921 647,921 Public Works 766,845 2,450 769,295 Public Safety 1,936,031 24,750 1,960,781 Emergency Management 442,678 6,650 449,328 Non Departmental - Materials and Services 667,883 667,883 Non Departmental -Transfers Out 1,906,357 1,906,357 Non Departmental - Contingency 763,897 (41,350) 722,547 Total Expenditures $ 8,208,322 0 $ 8,208,322

Roads Fund Adopted Budget Changes Amended Budget

Roads Program $ 1,180,806 9,250 $ 1,190,056 Contingency 236,561 (9,250) 227,311 Total Expenditures $ 1,417,367 0 $ 1,417,367

Wastewater Fund Adopted Budget Changes Amended Budget

Wastewater Program $ 1,359,964 7,600 $ 1,367,564 Debt Service 28,500 28,500 Transfers Out 1,260,000 1,260,000 Contingency 277,693 (7,600) 270,093 Total Expenditures $ 2,926,157 0 $ 2,926,157

Resolution No. 21-27

Water Fund Adopted Budget Changes Amended Budget

Wastewater Program $ 1,136,699 2,850 $ 1,139,549 Debt Service 27,407 27,407 Transfers Out 2,122,667 2,122,667 Contingency 232,821 (2,850) 229,971 Total Expenditures $ 3,519,594 0 $ 3,519,594

Recycle Fund Adopted Budget Changes Amended Budget

Wastewater Program $ 260,162 3,800 $ 263,962 Contingency 26,000 (3,800) 22,200 Total Expenditures $ 286,162 0 $ 286,162

Passed by the Common Council of the City of Cannon Beach this 7th day of September 2021, by the following role call vote:

YEAS: NAYS: EXCUSED:

______Sam Steidel, Mayor Attest:

______Bruce St. Denis, City Manager

Resolution No. 21-27 Attachment B ‐ Verkada Camera Locations Attachment B

33 Cameras 4 ‐ City Hall 7 ‐ Police Department 4 ‐ Wastewater Lab 5 ‐ Public Works Yard 1 ‐ Skate Park 4 ‐ Downtown Intersections 2 ‐ Recycle Center 1‐ North Water Tank Site 3 ‐ Emergency Cache Sites 1 ‐ RV Park 1 ‐ Water Treatment Plant CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

RESOLUTION NO. 21-28 ADOPTING FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET BY MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF THE CITY OF CANNON BEACH FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 2021 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2022 ______

Agenda Date: September 7, 2021 Prepared by: Laurie A. Sawrey, Finance Director Rusty Barrett, IT Director

BACKGROUND

Staff consults with our insurance agent, Alycia Johnson, Assured Partners, during each budget process working on estimates and coverage needs. CIS (City County Insurance Services) has been providing our Cyber coverage each year for $250,000 of coverage with a $5,000 deductible. Staff had expected to continue with the same coverage for budget year 2021-2022. Mid-June, as staff was finalizing the insurance renewals with our agent, she informed us that CIS had changed their deductible for that program to $250,000.

Alycia began exploring options for better coverage although it would cost more than the $1,150 premium we were expecting to pay for the continued coverage with CIS.

ANALYSIS/INFORMATION

Staff feels it is prudent to have some coverage to mitigate losses from ransomware attacks. Our agent is recommending coverage through Beazley. Coverage is for 1 million with a retention of $5,000 and an annual premium of $14,160. Attached is an email from Alycia that includes more detailed information.

Since we did not budget for this expenditure a budget adjustment will be required for the extra expense as outlined in the attached Resolution No. 21-28.

RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 21-28 for the purpose of adopting a supplemental budget by making appropriations for municipal purposes of the City of Cannon Beach for fiscal year commencing July 1, 2021 and ending June 30, 2022.

Staff suggests the following motion: “I move to approve Resolution No. 21-28 for the purpose of adopting a supplemental budget by making appropriations for municipal purposes of the City of Cannon Beach for fiscal year commencing July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021”.

List of Attachments A Resolution No. 21-28 B Email and graph from our insurance agent, Alycia Johnson

PO Box 368 Cannon Beach, Oregon 97110 • (503) 436-1581 • TTY (503) 436-8097 • FAX (503) 436-2050 www.ci.cannon-beach.or.us • [email protected] Attachment A

BEFORE THE CITY OF CANNON BEACH

FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADOPTING A SUPPLE- ) RESOLUTION NO. 21-28 MENTAL BUDGET BY MAKING APPROPRIA- ) TIONS FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES OF THE CITY ) OF CANNON BEACH FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ) COMMENCING JULY 1, 2021 AND ENDING JUNE ) 30, 2022 )

WHEREAS, a local government may prepare a supplemental budget under ORS 294.471 and ORS 294.473 if there is an occurrence or condition which had not been ascertained at the time of the preparation of the budget which requires a change in financial planning; and

WHEREAS, the City of Cannon Beach has recently been made aware of a change to our cyber insurance coverage with CIS (City County Insurance Services) which went from a deductible of $5,000 at July 1, 2020 to $250,000 and is effective July 1, 2021.

WHEREAS, CIS made this change in mid-June and much too late for the city to re- search other options for better coverage and allow for that cost in the budget process in May 2021;

WHEREAS, city management and city’s insurance agent recommends more robust coverage to mitigate the risk of ransomware attacks; and

WHEREAS, the city’s insurance agent brought two options for the city to consider to replace the CIS coverage; and

WHEREAS, with assistance from our agent, the city has an approved application for coverage from Beazley at an annual cost of $14,160 and with a $5,000 retention and a 1 million limit; and

WHEREAS, an increase in appropriations is necessary to fund this expense; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cannon Beach hereby adopts the supplemental budget as follows: 2021-2022 budget changes to the Administrative Services Fund to increase charges for service by $14,500 and increase expenditures in the Central Services Depart- ment by $14,500.

Administrative Services Fund Adopted Budget Changes Amended Budget

Total Resources $ 1,999,995 14, 500 $ 2,014,495

Executive $ 561,832 $ 561,832 Finance 516,765 516,765 IT 264,984 264,984 Central Services 230,600 14,500 245,100 Public Works 425,814 425,814

Total Expenditures $ 1,999,995 14,500 $ 2,014,495

Ending Fund Balance $ 0 $ 0

Total Requirements $ 1,999,995 14,500 $ 2,014,495 Resolution No. 21-28

Passed by the Common Council of the City of Cannon Beach this 7th day of September 2021, by the following role call vote:

YEAS: NAYS: EXCUSED:

______Sam Steidel, Mayor

Attest:

______Bruce St. Denis, City Manager

Resolution No. 21-28 Attachment B

CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 21-29 FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROVING INCREASES AND DECREASES TO THE FY 2021-2022 BUDGET BY MAKING AN INTRAFUND TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATIONS ______

Agenda Date: September 7, 2021 Prepared by: Bruce St.Denis, City Manager

BACKGROUND

At the August work session, I proposed hiring a Receptionist/Court Clerk due to the current and potential upcoming workload.

ANALYSIS/INFORMATION

Before you is Resolution 21-29 making the necessary budget adjustments to finance this position from November through June 30th for $52,100. These funds are coming from contingency.

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt resolution 21-29.

Suggested motion:

“I move to Adopt Resolution 21-29 for the Purpose of Approving Increases and Decreases to the FY 2021- 2022 Budget by Making an Intrafund Transfer of Appropriations.”

List of Attachments A Draft Resolution 21-29

PO Box 368 Cannon Beach, Oregon 97110 • (503) 436-1581 • TTY (503) 436-8097 • FAX (503) 436-2050 www.ci.cannon-beach.or.us • [email protected] Attachment A

BEFORE THE CITY OF CANNON BEACH

FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROVING INCREASES ) RESOLUTION NO. 21-29 AND DECREASES TO THE FY 2021-2022 BUDGET ) BY MAKING AN INTRAFUND TRANSFER OF AP- ) PROPRIATIONS ) ) )

WHEREAS, the workload of the positions in the finance department have been maxed out; and

WHEREAS, a number of things have come together that cause management to recommend funding an additional position at this time; and

WHEREAS, implementation of a prepared food tax this spring will require additional staff resources; and

WHEREAS, an increase in capital projects and debt service will require additional financial oversight of project loan draws; and

WHEREAS, the finance department is responsible for running the municipal court which has seen an increase in the amount of tickets being issued and there is a need for additional staffing resources to cover administration of that function; and

WHEREAS, the cost for staffing this position will be in the General Fund, Executive Department; and

WHEREAS, an increase in appropriations is necessary to fund this personnel cost; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cannon Beach hereby adopts the following budget changes to the General Fund, Executive Department to increase expenditures by $52,100 and decrease contingency by $52,100.

General Fund Adopted Budget Changes Amended Budget Executive $ 1,084,210 52,100 $ 1,136,310 Community Development 647,921 647,921 Public Works 769,295 769,295 Public Safety 1,960,781 1,960,781 Emergency Management 449,328 449,328 Non Departmental - Materials and Services 667,883 667,883 Non Departmental -Transfers Out 1,906,357 1,906,357 Non Departmental - Contingency 722,547 (52,100) 670,447 Total Expenditures $ 8,208,322 0 $ 8,208,322

Passed by the Common Council of the City of Cannon Beach this 7th day of September 2021, by the following role call vote:

YEAS: NAYS: EXCUSED:

Resolution No. 21-29

______Sam Steidel, Mayor

Attest:

______Bruce St. Denis, City Manager

Resolution No. 21-29 CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

CONSIDERATION OF PROCLAMATION 21-09, NATIONAL HISPANIC HERITAGE MONTH ______

Agenda Date: September 7, 2021 Prepared by: Bruce St.Denis, City Manager

BACKGROUND

Before Council tonight is a proclamation regarding the celebration of National Hispanic Heritage Month.

Every year National Hispanic Heritage Month (HHM) is observed by Americans across the United States. The celebration began in 1968, under President Lyndon B. Johnson, and was made a month-long celebration in 1988 by the U.S. Congress.

The September 15th date is significant because it is the anniversary of independence for the Latin American countries Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. In addition, Mexico and Chile celebrate their independence days on September 16 and September 18, respectively. Also, Columbus Day or Día de la Raza, which is October 12, falls within this 30-day period.

RECOMMENDATION

Suggested motion is

"I move to adopt Proclamation 21-09, declaring September 15 – October 15 as National Hispanic Heritage Month in Cannon Beach"

List of Attachments A Proclamation 21-09 National Hispanic Heritage Month

PO Box 368 Cannon Beach, Oregon 97110 • (503) 436-1581 • TTY (503) 436-8097 • FAX (503) 436-2050 www.ci.cannon-beach.or.us • [email protected] Attachment A

BEFORE THE CITY OF CANNON BEACH

FOR THE PURPOSE OF DESIGNATING ) PROCLAMATION NO. 21-09 SEPTEMBER 15 THROUGH OCTOBER 15, ) 2020, AS NATIONAL HISPANIC HERITAGE ) MONTH IN CANNON BEACH )

WHEREAS, the period from September 15 through October 15 is has been set aside throughout the United States as National Hispanic Heritage Month; and WHEREAS, the term Hispanic or Latino refers to a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin who can be of any race, any ancestry or any ethnicity; and WHEREAS, the United States has always drawn its strength from the contributions of a diverse people; and WHEREAS, National Hispanic Heritage Month is a time to recognize the contributions made and the important presence of Hispanic and Latino Americans to the United States; and WHEREAS, Hispanic Americans have played a prominent and important role in our national heritage and our Hispanic American residents lift up our communities and our economy as entrepreneurs, executives, and small business owners, and WHEREAS, A significant segment of the more than 40,000 people living in Clatsop county are Hispanic; and WHEREAS, we honor the rich heritage of our Hispanic community. BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Sam Steidel by virtue of the authority vested in me as Mayor of the City of Cannon Beach in the State of Oregon do hereby proclaim the month of September 15 through October 15 as

NATIONAL HISPANIC HERITAGE MONTH in Cannon Beach and call upon public officials, educators, and all residents to observe this month with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and programs as they to share in this special annual tribute by learning and celebrating the generations of Hispanic and Latino Americans who have positively influenced and enriched our nation and society.

PASSED by the Common Council of the City of Cannon Beach this 7th day of September 2021, by the following roll call vote:

YEAS: NAYS: EXCUSED:

Attest:

Bruce St. Denis, City Manager Sam Steidel, City Mayor CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

C/M CONTRACT MODIFICATION FROM CITY PROVIDED VEHICLE TO VEHICLE ALLOWANCE ______

Agenda Date: September 7, 2021 Prepared by: Ashley Driscoll, City Attorney

BACKGROUND

City Manager Bruce St. Denis’ employment contract with the City of Cannon Beach requires the City provide St. Denis a take home vehicle. The City has provided such a vehicle since 2017. A replacement vehicle was budgeted for FY21-22, but after a discussion with the Council was cancelled.

Instead, the parties believe it is in their interests to provide St. Denis a $500 per month vehicle allowance in lieu of a take home vehicle. .

This decision will require a modification in the manager’s contract with the City. Because of the current state of the vehicle market St. Denis requests some flexibility in the effective date to allow time to find an acceptable vehicle.

ANALYSIS/INFORMATION

In approving this request the city will eliminate an on-going obligation for maintenance and replacement of a vehicle for the city manager. The vehicle currently being used by the City Manager will be repurposed to the building department.

RECOMMENDATION

Approve the city manager’s request for a modification to the existing contract with the city.

List of Attachments A Contract Amendment

{00770328; 1 }PO Box 368 Cannon Beach, Oregon 97110 • (503) 436-1581 • TTY (503) 436-8097 • FAX (503) 436-2050 www.ci.cannon-beach.or.us • [email protected] Attachment A

CITY OF CANNON BEACH, OREGON CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT As of 30 days after the acquirement of a personal vehicle, the City Manager employment agreement effective November 14, 2017 shall be amended as follows:

The original Section 7 AUTOMOBILE AND GENERAL EXPENSES, subsection 7.1 and 7.2 shall be deleted in its entirety as they refer to the city provided vehicle and the new subsection 7.1 shall be added. Subsection 7.3 shall be renumbered. Section 7 shall state:

7. AUTOMOBILE AND GENERAL EXPENSES.

7.1 The City shall provide Employee a monthly automobile allowance of $500 per month (less any required withholdings for tax purposes) for expenses to cover all costs of use, maintenance, repair, upkeep, fuel, cleaning and operation of his automobile.

7.2. City shall reimburse Employee for expenditures incurred in the course of conducting City business for meals, lodging and other job-related expenditures as consistent with City policy and Internal Revenue Service guidelines.

This is the only change to the original employment agreement. The entire remainder of the original agreement remains in full force. CITY: EMPLOYEE:

Print name: _Sam Steidel______Print name: Bruce St. Denis______

Title: Mayor Title: City Manager

Date:______Date:______

CANNON BEACH CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT

LOC VOTING DELEGATE FOR ANNUAL MEMBER MEETING ______

Agenda Date: September 7, 2021 Prepared by: Bruce St. Denis, City Manager

ANALYSIS/INFORMATION

The LOC’s Annual Membership Meeting is scheduled for October 21-23 in Bend. Each member city is entitled to cast one vote at the membership meeting. Last year Mayor Steidel was the voting delegate and Councilor Benefield the alternate.

RECOMMENDATION

Council to reach a consensus for the voting delegate, and alternative, for the October Annual Membership meeting.

PO Box 368 Cannon Beach, Oregon 97110 • (503) 436-1581 • TTY (503) 436-8097 • FAX (503) 436-2050 www.ci.cannon-beach.or.us • [email protected] City of Cannon Beach Monthly Status Report

To: Mayor and City Council

From: City Manager Bruce St. Denis

Date: September 7, 2021

Planning Commission: The Planning Commission meets on August 26th, to consider the following item: • Public Hearing and Consideration of SR 21-05, David Vonada request, on behalf of Dana & Thurman Cardwell, of 1696 S. Hemlock, for a Setback Reduction of the rear-yard setback requirement for an entry-arbor in conjunction with a fence for an existing residence.

Design Review Board: The Design Review Board met on August 19th, to consider the following item: • Public Hearing and Consideration of DRB 21-20, Robert Lundin application on behalf of Hallmark Inns and Resorts for an exterior walkway bridge to connect buildings. • Public Hearing and Consideration of DRB 21-22, Jason and Elisabeth Menke application on behalf of SeaLevel Bakery and Coffee for an addition to extend production facilities and second-story office, staff room and storage space.

The Chair of the DRB, approved minor modifications for the following addresses:

Bald Eagle Coffee House building 1064 S Hemlock Re-roof CB Conference Center 289 N Spruce Remove & replace existing rooftop packaged unit Jeff Nicholson 279 N Hemlock Remove damaged & susceptible tree

Short-term Rentals: Staff continued to process short-term rental permits in June:

Program Number of permits

14-day permit 123

Lifetime Unlimited permit 48

5-year Unlimited permit 36

Total permits 207

New short-term rentals this month 1

Pending short-term rentals 1

City Manager Report September 7, 2021 1 of 6

Building Permits: Staff processed a total of 10 building, 17 mechanical and 8 plumbing permits in July:

Permit Type # of Permit Fees Value Affordable Affordable permits Housing Housing Surcharge, Surcharge, Fiscal Current Month Year to date

Building 10 $17,652.62 $ 1,648,396.66 $ 16,483.97 $ 16,483.97

Mechanical 17 $4,061.98

Plumbing 8 $3,239.00

Monthly Total 35 $24,953.60

Other Planning/Building Matters: ● The CD Staff supported the City Manager’ Office completing 4 Public Records Request(s) for the month, accounting for approximately four hours; ● The CD Department processed two Development Permits; ● The CD Director attended the monthly TSP call with the project management team for the TGM/TSP, and held the first Project Advisory Committee Meeting; ● The TSP received the Existing Conditions report and Parking Survey Summary, which were uploaded to cannonbeachtsp.com; ● The City received notification from the Oregon Court of Appeals that the City’s decision to deny the Roberts development permit for a new residence in the Oceanfront Management zone has been appealed for an October 4th, 2021, oral testimony before the court; ● The CD Director received a draft Memorandum of Understanding for review regarding the scope of work for the application for Natural Hazard Mitigation towards proposed solutions for bank stabilization of the North Bank of the Ecola Creek Estuary; ● The CD Department worked with CB Code Audit consultants to prepare for the September 8th, 2021, Kick-Off Joint Work Session with the Council, Planning Commission and Design Review Board; ● The CD Director continues to participate on the Project Advisory Committee for the City of Astoria’s Tsunami Evacuation Facilities Improvement Plan; ● The CD Department held interviews for the new position for Planner I; ● The CD Director continued to finalize with the Public Works Department on state permitting project for Southwind clean spoils site, submitting a 1200-C application with DEQ; ● The CD Director met with local business owners to discuss the new Special Events Ordinance, application and brochure and a Special Events banner program; ● The CD Department worked with the Public Works and private property owners to investigate the re- alignment of a portion of View Point Terrace travel-surface;

City Manager Report September 7, 2021 2 of 6 ● The CD Director met with Laurel St. property owners and contractor regarding remedial dune grading development permitting; ● The CD Director spoke with property owners about possible annexation and development in the UGB; ● The CD Director and Building Official worked with the City of Astoria on an addendum to the IGA to allow for Building Inspection coverage for the next two months;

Public Works Department Report – August Water • Repaired 2” PVC water main blowout at 1st and Laurel. • Repaired eight other leaks at various locations, including two at the water plant. • Replaced back-up chlorine pump when the old one failed. • Educated customers on Eye on Water (Total: 412 signed up). • Installed 199 new cellular LTE meters (Total: 1,399 installed). • Conducted monthly meter reads. • Serviced water tank at Coaster Properties Building (designated Red Cross emergency resource). • Performed maintenance and adjustments to the slow sand filters at the Water Plant. • Completed weekly locates and work orders. • Performed callout duties. • Notified multiple users of water leaks • Replaced battery at the North Reservoir tank. • Entered LTE data into Beacon and Caselle.

Wastewater • Prepped for sewer lateral cleaning and wet well cleaning in areas with very limited access. • Met with Cannon Beach Electric, Civil West and management regarding Matanuska cover & generator project and Haystack Pump Station project. • Conducted hydraulic cleaning of laterals in lines out on the beach. • Vacuumed all the sand, rocks and grease in the two wet wells located adjacent to the beach. • Performed annual service and calibration of all the treatment plant’s probes, sensors and samplers. • Performed annual service and calibration of all of the lab instruments and equipment. • Troubleshot the effluent sampler. • Repaired several spots in sewer lateral on Harrison Street in preparation for new asphalt. • Prepped for end-of-season collection system cleaning and pump and impeller condition analysis. • Completed a thorough cleaning/sanitizing lab and offices. • Installed new service tap in Haystack Heights. • Did prep work for new service taps at Logan Lane and Ross Lane.

Parks • Assisted with striping tennis courts for pickleball. • Completed new Sitka beach access and Orford beach access. City Manager Report September 7, 2021 3 of 6 • Facilitated use of bandstand and soccer fields. • Conducted ongoing landscape maintenance, including hedges and rose garden. • Irrigated City properties. • Established tree planting locations for this fall. • Planted a tree in the Laurel Street right-of-way. • Monitored purple martin box usage. • Attempted to maintain flower baskets and fight off aphids and mildew.

Roads & Storm • Prepped for asphalt on E Harrison between Hemlock and Spruce. o Repaired two sinkholes. o Hooked up an old storm drain. o Trimmed overhead trees to provide more clearance for paving trucks. • Prepped Glenwood Ct., Kimberly Ct. and Elkland Ct. for paving. o Repaired and converted two sewer cleanouts. o Trimmed overhead trees to provide clearance. • Prepped N Larch for asphalt. o Removed old asphalt. o Raised a sewer manhole. o Adjusted grading of road for better storm drainage. • Completed new Sitka beach access. • Picked up garbage. • Cleared beach access ramps. • Mowed rights-of-way. • Installed catch basin on E Jackson.

Emergency Management – August

• Assisted with Community Bulletin deployment – Improved results and feedback driving progress • Expedite security options for the cache sites. Game Cameras are in place • Researched and developed improved video surveillance for city buildings and vulnerable locations o Coming before council for approval • Wayfinding Wednesday – We participate first Wednesdays of each month • DOGAMI improved data for Cannon Beach – Draft form • Move forward with improving the Tsunami Evacuation maps • Working on improved “You are here signs” • Bi-Weekly MRC communications training and participation • Communications and Coordination with Clatsop County Emergency Management o Communications Plan (Clatsop County), • Ongoing updates when significant issues arise to Staff, Council, Community (Weather, Outbreaks, State Mandates) • COVID-19 SIT-Reps restarted for enhanced communions City Manager Report September 7, 2021 4 of 6 • Attend weekly Business meetings to receive and to deliver up to date information • Working on MOU with Neighbors to the East (Green land forestry) o MOU draft for Greenland forestry’s to begin May 2021 (DRAFT only) o MOU draft for the Recovery excavation companies to stage equipment in Cannon Beach • North Tank Radio (KMUN – HAM- GMRS) tower development continued – All equipment installed and soon to be operational • Getting bids from Pacific Power for all three cache sites • EOC radio development, continuing. Waiting on specific equipment. • Radio programming for All staff leadership positions, and PD home HAM / PD radios. • New generators for cache sites (Grant HPO), cabinets and generator serviced, and they are in the cache sites- Operational. • Schedule for remainder of 2021 calendar year completed. • Drone training for city triage capability.

Haystack Rock Awareness Program (HRAP) – August

• OSU Sea Grant Scholars Amishi Singh and Andrea Vega have finished their fellowships with HRAP and provided reports on optimizing and improving the virtual field trip program and optimizing science communication. • Face masks are required at the tide pools when social distancing cannot be maintained in accordance with Governor Brown’s outdoor mask policy. • Using funds from an Oregon Community Foundation grant, HRAP hosted a free field trip in both Spanish and English for students in the Migrant Education Program. • HRAP Director Kelli Ennis attended the Northwest Aquatic Marine Educators (NAME) Annual Conference, held virtually this year, and presented a short talk about network map creation. • All of the Tufted Puffins are expected to return to the Pacific Ocean by the end of this month, official count estimates will calculated by USFWS. • HRAP staff participated in the rescue of six birds to the Wildlife Center of the North Coast this month. • Two months remain on HRAP’s beach season.

City Manager Report September 7, 2021 5 of 6 Public Safety Report – July 2021

Staffing: Authorized Assigned Sworn 8 7 Code Enforcement 1 1 Admin/Support 2 1 Parking/Information 6 6 Lifeguards 10 9

July 2021 July 2020 Station Activity: CBPD Walk-in 169 268 CBPD Incoming Phone 445 639 SPD Dispatched Calls 134 128 Overnight Camping Warnings 99 216

Local Security Checks 2780 3247 Traffic Warnings 150 112 Traffic Citations 18 25 DUII Arrests 1 2 Alarm Responses 15 8 AOA, Including FD 29 49 Citizen Assists 14 23 Transient Contacts 7 7 Total Case File Reports 386 599 Cases of Significance: Attempt to Elude 1 Case Burglary 1 Case Criminal Mischief 2 Cases Criminal Trespass: 2 Cases Disorderly Conduct II: 1 Case Disturbance Domestic 1 Case Disturbance Noise/Verbal: 2 Cases DUII: 1 Case Fireworks 12 Cases Fraud: 2 Cases Reckless Endangering: 1 Case Theft: 5 Cases Warrant/Fugitive Arrest: 1 Cases

Traffic Citations: Driving with Suspended License: 4 Citations Oper. Veh. Using Mobile Device: 4 Citations Reckless Endangering: 1 Citation Unsafe Passing: 1 Citation Reckless Driving: 1 Citation Violation of Basic Rule/Speeding: 6 Citations (76/55,65/55,67/55,42/25,77/55,75/55)

Code Enforcement Activities: During this period, 27 municipal code violations were addressed and resolved or pending resolution.

City Manager Report September 7, 2021 6 of 6