May 17, 2011 10:00 a.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Andy Duyck, Chairman: As Chairman of Washington County's five-member governing Board, Andy Duyck represents the entire County. He has operated his own business since 1983. Duyck Machine, Inc. produces metal and plastic components that are marketed throughout the country. Prior to opening his business, Chairman Duyck was employed as a machinist for OMET and Forest Grove Iron Works. Chairman Duyck has a degree in machine technologies from Portland Community College. As Commissioner, District 4, he served Western Washington County for 16 years. Chairman Duyck has many personal and public roles. He has served on the boards of Community Action, Centro Cultural of Washington County, Council of Forest Trust Lands, and many others. Chairman Duyck currently serves on the following boards and committees: The Hillsboro Chamber of Commerce, Association of Oregon Counties: Governance Committee, Co-Chair and Special Operations Committee, Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC), Metro Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT), Fairgrounds Advisory Committee, Cultural Coalition of Washington County, Washington County Visitors Association Board of Directors, Hillsboro Airport Issues Roundtable and the Board of Clean Water Services. Chairman Duyck’s term as Chair runs through December 2014.
Dick Schouten, District 1 Commissioner: Commissioner Dick Schouten has represented Aloha, Beaverton and Cooper Mt. area since June of 2000. Commissioner Schouten's family migrated from the Netherlands to California when he was four. Following a childhood spent in Fresno, he completed his undergraduate work at Santa Clara University and earned his law degree from UCLA. After serving as legal counsel for California cities, Dick, his wife and two daughters moved to Washington County in 1992. He has represented The Make Our Park Whole Committee, which helped obtain a 22-acre addition to the Tualatin Hills Nature Park. In 2003, he was awarded Oregon Parks Providers' "Legislator of the Year.” Commissioner Schouten serves Metro's Active Transportation Council, Bridges to Housing Portland Regional Steering Committee, Homeless Plan Advisory Committee, Community Action Board of Directors, Regional Emergency Management Group, Westside Transportation Alliance Board, Community Development Block Grant Policy Advisory Board, Creative Arts Network and the Board of Clean Water Services. Commissioner Schouten's term runs through December 2012.
Greg Malinowski, District 2 Commissioner: Commissioner Greg Malinowski serves Washington County's northeastern corner including Bethany, Cedar Hills, Cedar Mill, Raleigh Hills, Rock Creek and portions of Beaverton and Hillsboro. He and his family manage 60-acres of farmland growing organic hay and beef between Washington County’s Bethany area and Portland’s Forest Park. In addition, Commissioner Malinowski has worked for over 30 years in high-technology manufacturing and quality inventory control with Merix and Tektronix. Commissioner Malinowski’s community involvement has included service as a past chair of Washington County’s Citizen Participation Organization 7 in the Bethany area. He is also a past president of the Forest Park Neighborhood Association representing the Tualatin Mountains area of northwest Portland. Commissioner Malinowski holds an associate’s degree in electronics servicing technology from Portland Community College. He serves on the Association of Oregon Counties Legislative Committee, Commission on Children and Families, Public Safety Coordinating Council and on the Board of Clean Water Services. Commissioner Malinowski's term runs through December 2014.
Roy Rogers, District 3 Commissioner and Vice-Chair: Commissioner Rogers represents District 3, which includes the cities of Tigard, Tualatin, King City and Sherwood. A Certified Public Accountant (CPA), Commissioner Rogers is a partner in the firm of Pauly Rogers & Company PC, one of the largest municipal auditors in the state of Oregon. Prior to becoming one of Oregon's longest-serving county commissioners, Commissioner Roger’s other governmental experience included service as Mayor, City of Tualatin (1978- 1985), President, Oregon Mayor's Association, a member of the Metro Policy Committee on Transportation Study, and League of Oregon Cities Committees. Commissioner Rogers currently serves on METRO’s Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT), Washington County Audit Committee, Washington County Coordinating Committee, Worksystems, Inc. Workforce Investment Board, and the Board of Clean Water Services. Commissioner Rogers’ term runs through December 2012.
Bob Terry, District 4 Commissioner: Commissioner Terry represents a large portion of the rural area of Washington County including Banks, Cornelius, Forest Grove, Gaston, Hillsboro, and North Plains. Since 1996, Commissioner Terry has owned Fisher Farms, a regional provider of value-added nursery stock employing over 200 people and based in rural Washington County. Originally from St. Louis, Missouri, He served in the U.S. Navy from 1962 to 1966, including deployment aboard the supercarrier USS America. Commissioner Terry resumed his education at the University of Chicago. His community and government experience includes service as A Child's Place, Hillsboro Chamber of Commerce, Oregon International Airshow, Oregon Association of Nurseries, American Nursery and Landscape Association, Agri-Business Council of Oregon, Tualatin Watershed Council, Regional Investment Board, County Budget Committee. Commissioner Terry also serves on the Board of Clean Water Services. Commissioner Terry's term through December 2014.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COMMISSIONER DISTRICTS 4
OTHER COUNTY AND CWS CONTACTS 4
MEETINGS AND SCHEDULES 5 Current Meeting Schedule 5 Regular Business Meetings 5 Worksessions 5 Second Tuesdays of the Month 5 Board Meetings When There is a Fifth Tuesday in a Month 5 Executive Sessions 5 Once the Regular Business Meeting Begins 6 Ordinance Testimony Time Limits 6 Alternatives to Televised Proceedings 6 Assistive Listening Devices 7 Sign Language and Interpreters 7 Meeting Protocol 7 Meeting Calendar 8
1. CONSENT AGENDA The items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and will all be adopted in one motion unless a Board member or person in the audience requests, before the vote on the motion, to have the item considered separately. If any item is removed from the Consent Agenda, the Chairman will indicate when it will be discussed in the regular agenda. A list of Consent Agenda items is included at the end of the agenda packet.
2. ORAL COMMUNICATION Limited to two minutes per individual; ten minutes total.
3. PROCLAMATION a. Proclaim May 15-21, 2011 as Emergency Medical Services Week 9
4. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS a. Appoint Members to the Civil Service Commission 11 b. Appoint Members to the Urban Road Maintenance District Advisory 13 Committee (URMDAC)
5. LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION a. Consider the 2011 Long Range Planning Division and Land Use 15 Ordinance Work Program and Authorize Filing of Land Use Ordinances (CPO All)
6. ORAL COMMUNICATION
7. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS
8. ADJOURNMENT
CONSENT AGENDA
APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 22, 2011 17 April 26, 2011 38 May 3, 2011 62
CLEAN WATER SERVICES a. Award a Construction Manager/General Contractor Contract for the Field 73 Operations Interior Remodel to Cedar Mill Construction Company (City of Beaverton) b. Approve Contract for Landscape Maintenance Services at the 75 Administrative Building Complex with Portland Habilitation Center, Inc. c. Approve Final Change Order with Stettler Supply Company for the Waste 77 Activated Sludge Phosphorus and Magnesium Stripping Process (WASSTRIP™) at the Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility, Accept Construction of the Project and Release Retainage (CPO 4)
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION d. Approve Agreement with City of Forest Grove for Road Improvements, 79 Waterline Installation, and Electrical Facilities for the David Hill Road Extension Project (CPO 12F, 13) e. Approve Contract Amendment No. 2.0 with Mackay & Sposito for Design 83 Engineering for the Boones Ferry Road (Norwood Road to Day Road) Project (CPO 5)
f. Vacate a Portion of NW 123rd Avenue (Public Right-of-Way) (CPO 1) 87
COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE g. Adopt Resolution and Order Establishing General Guidelines for County 95 Use of Federal Timber Safety Net Funds
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT h. Approve Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Community 99 Development Block Grant-Recovery (CDBG-R) Contract Amendments with North Plains Senior Center
HOUSING SERVICES i. Approve FY 2010 Supportive Housing Program Renewal Grant Agreement - 101 Hillsboro Graduated Independent Living Program
SHERIFF’S OFFICE j. Approve a Resolution and Order Increasing Budget Appropriations for the 103 Sheriffs Office
SUPPORT SERVICES k. Approve Contract Amendment with Integrated Power Systems Inc. 107 l. Amend the 2010-2011 Washington County Position and Salary Report 109 Increasing the Number of Positions by 1.0 FTE Senior Mental Health Services Coordinator m. Authorize Increase in Purchase Orders for Janitorial Supplies 111 n. Discontinue Funding for Risk Master Maintenance Enhancement Services 113 Agreement o. Accept Bid/Award Contract for Providing and Installing Carpet 115
SERVICES DISTRICT FOR LIGHTING NO. 1 p. Form Assessment Area, Authorize Maximum Annual Assessment, and 117 Impose a First Year Assessment for Sarah Court Apartments (CPO 1) q. Set Public Hearing on Changes to Street Lighting Assessment Areas for 127 Fiscal Year 2011-2012 (CPO All) r. Approve Street Lighting Assessments for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 (CPO All) 131
URBAN ROAD MAINTENANCE DISTRICT s. Approve Bid Award and Execute Contract for the 2011 Urban Road 135 Maintenance District and City of Sherwood Slurry Seal Project (CPO All)
COMMISSIONER DISTRICTS (Chairman Serves Countywide)
OTHER COUNTY AND CWS CONTACTS
Robert Davis, County Administrator 846-8685 Don Bohn, Assistant County Administrator 846-8685 Rob Massar, Assistant County Administrator County Departments District Attorney, Robert Hermann 846-8671 Assessment & Taxation, Elections, 846-8741 Health & Human Services, Rod Branyan 846-4402 Rich Hobernicht Including Animal Services, Disability, Aging and Veterans Services Auditor, John Hutzler 846-8798 Housing Services, Val Valfre, Director 846-4794 Community Corrections, Reed Ritchey 846-3400 Juvenile, Dennis Kenna 846-8861 Community Development, Jennie Proctor 846-8814 Land Use and Transportation, Andrew 846-4530 Singelakis, Director Cooperative Library, Eva Calcagno 846-3222 Sheriff, Rob Gordon 846-2700 County Counsel, Dan Olsen 846-8747 Support Services, Don Bohn 846-8685 Clean Water Services William Gaffi, General Manager 681-3600 TBD, Deputy General Manager 681-3602 Jerry Linder, General Counsel 681-3645 Mark Jockers, Government and Public Affairs 681-4450 Manager
MEETINGS AND SCHEDULES
Current Meeting Schedule First Tuesdays: Worksession 8:30 a.m. Regular Business Meeting 10:00 a.m. Second Tuesdays: See “Second Tuesdays” section below. Third Tuesdays: Worksession 8:30 a.m. Regular Business Meeting 10:00 a.m. Fourth Tuesdays: Worksession 2:00 p.m. Regular Business Meeting 6:30 p.m. Fifth Tuesdays: See the “Fifth Tuesday” section below.
Regular Business Meetings Regular business meetings are the time during which the Board will consider the items published in their Board Agenda at the times noted above.
Worksessions Prior to the Board’s regular business meetings, the Commissioners will meet for a general public worksession in Room 140 of the Public Services Center according to the schedule above. The purpose of this meeting is to provide the Board an opportunity to conduct informal communications with each other, review the agenda and identify questions they may have for staff before taking action on the agenda items in their regular business meeting. The Board typically asks our citizens observing the worksession meetings to hold their agenda comments and questions for the regular business meeting.
Second Tuesdays of the Month The Board has designated the second Tuesday of each month as a time that may be set aside for in-depth discussion of broader, strategic policy issues. Accordingly, Board consideration/action on regularly scheduled agenda items normally set on the second Tuesday of each month will be held only if necessary to make decisions that, in the Board’s judgment, cannot be reasonably held over to a regularly scheduled meeting. If formal actions are not considered on these Tuesdays, the Board may use this time to conduct an informal worksession, retreat or similar informal meeting. Minutes will be recorded of these meetings.
Board Meetings When There is a Fifth Tuesday in a Month Historically, the Board has not held meetings when there is a fifth Tuesday in a month. Since May of 1999, the Board has set aside these fifth Tuesdays to hold a worksession, retreat or similar informal meeting. The purpose of these meetings is to provide the Board some additional time to focus on specific issues on a more in depth basis. Unlike its regular Board meetings, these informal meetings are not recorded verbatim, but minutes will be taken as required by law. No formal actions will be taken during these meetings unless special meeting notices are provided as outlined in the Board’s Rules of Procedure. The Chairman will designate the location of these meetings 96 hours in advance.
Executive Sessions There are times when the Board must discuss confidential matters such as lawsuits, real estate transactions (or other sales transactions) and labor relations matters. When the Board calls an executive session (posted on the worksession agenda), it is done under the guidelines allowed for by Oregon State law. Each type of executive session generally fits under one of three types of State Laws that allow such closed sessions. These statutes are indicated on the worksession item. Although the press is allowed to remain in the room, they are not allowed to report on executive
session issues. The Board recognizes the sensitivity of conducting closed sessions and only conducts them when confidentiality is required (and allowed by law) to protect the interests of Washington County and its taxpayers.
Once the Regular Business Meeting Begins The Board’s formal meetings typically include the following elements:
Call to Order: At the start of the meeting, the Chairman (or Vice Chair) of the Board will call the meeting to order. Consent Agenda: The items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and will all be adopted in one motion unless a Board member or person in the audience requests, before the vote on the motion, to have the item considered separately. If any item is removed from the Consent Agenda, the Chairman will indicate when it will be discussed in the regular agenda. A list of Consent Agenda items is included at the end of the agenda packet. Oral Communication (for non-agenda items): This is the time when members of the audience may step forward to address the Board. This opportunity is time-limited to 2 minutes per individual and 10 minutes total per topic. If more time is needed, another (longer) oral communication opportunity is available at the end of the regular agenda. Speakers may select only one Oral Communication opportunity. Presentations, Proclamations, Boards and Commissions Public Hearings:. Special rules regarding testimony and time limits may be established by the Board at the start of the hearing. Regular Agenda Items: Regular agenda items are also known as “action” items and will follow the public hearings. These items are less formal than the public hearings but still provide the public the opportunity to comment on the proposed actions. Second Opportunity for Oral Communication (for non-agenda items): As noted above, this is the second opportunity for the public to address the Board if more than two minutes are needed. This opportunity is time-limited to 5 minutes per individual and 10 minutes per topic. The maximum time for Oral Communication is 30 minutes. Board Announcements: This is typically the time when the Board may want to provide other Board members, staff or the public with information regarding items that may or may not be on the Board’s agenda. Adjournment: At the conclusion of the items on the Board’s agenda, the Board Chair will formally conclude the Board’s regular business meeting.
Ordinance Testimony Time Limits Public testimony for ordinances may be presented within the following time limits: First and second hearing - 3 minutes for individuals and 12 minutes for groups Additional hearings - 2 minutes for individuals and 5 minutes for groups
Alternatives to Televised Proceedings An alternative format to the televised proceedings of the meetings of the Washington County Board of Commissioners is available on request. Interested individuals may call the telephone number or TTY number noted below and request a verbatim transcript for this meeting.
Assistive Listening Devices Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and can be scheduled for this meeting by calling 503-846-8611 (voice) or 503-846-4598 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf) no later than 5:00 p.m., on the Monday preceding the meeting.
Sign Language and Interpreters The County will also upon request endeavor to arrange for the following services to be provided: 1. Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and 2. Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead-time as possible. Please notify the County of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date (same phone numbers as listed above: 503-846-8611 or 503-846- 4598).
Meeting Protocol The Board of Commissioners welcomes public attendance and participation at its meetings. Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item at a regular business meeting should feel free to do so. In doing so, the Board asks that the following guidelines be observed:
1. Please follow sign-in procedures located on the table by the entrance to the auditorium. 2. When your name is announced, please be seated at the table in front and state your name and home address for the record. 3. Groups or organizations wishing to make a presentation are asked to designate one spokesperson in the interest of time and to avoid repetition. 4. When more than one citizen is heard on any matter, please avoid repetition in your comments. Careful attention to the previous speaker’s remarks will be helpful in this regard.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING CALENDAR
Tuesday, May 17, 2011 Worksession – 8:30 a.m. Board Meeting – 10:00 a.m.
11:30 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. Budget Committee Meeting Law Enforcement Center Training Room 215 Adams Street, Hillsboro
Wednesday, May 18, 2011 1:00 – 4:30 p.m. Work Session – facilitated discussion leading to Board goals and priorities Jenkins Estate, 8005 SW Grabhorn Rd, Beaverton
Tuesday, May 24, 2011 Worksession – 2:00 p.m. Board Meeting – 6:30 p.m.
Thursday, May 26, 2011 FY 2011-12 Budget Hearing – 8:30 a.m. Public Services Building Auditorium
Tuesday, June 7, 2011 Worksession – 8:30 a.m. Board Meeting – 10:00 a.m.
MINUTES
WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
FEBRUARY 22, 2011
CONVENED: 6:35 p.m.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Andy Duyck Vice Chair Roy Rogers Commissioner Dick Schouten Commissioner Greg Malinowski Commissioner Bob Terry
STAFF: Robert Davis, County Administrator Rob Massar, Assistant County Administrator Dan Olsen, County Counsel Loretta Skurdahl, County Counsel Andrew Singelakis, Director, LUT Brent Curtis, Planning Division Manager, LUT Gary Stockhoff, CPM Manager, LUT Bob Cruz, Asst. General Manager, CWS Linda Gray, CPO Coordinator Jim Thiessen, Audiovisual Technician Marian Larkin, Recording Secretary
PRESS: Dana Tims, The Oregonian Kurt Eckert, Hillsboro Argus
1. CONSENT AGENDA
Chairman Duyck announced that item 1.b., 1.d. and 1.j. were pulled from the agenda this date to be considered at a later date. Item 1.c. was an award of Bid to Ovivo USA Llc for an amount $120,912.00. Item 1.h. was revised for this meeting date.
A motion was made to approve the Consent Agenda as amended.
Motion – Rogers 2nd – Schouten Vote: 5-0
CLEAN WATER SERVICES
1.a. CWS MO 11-21 Approve Fifth Amendment to Master Contract for Engineering Services with Carollo Engineers, Inc. for the Rock Creek Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility Tertiary Treatment, Struvite Recovery, and Electrical Switchgear Facilities Predesign Project No. 6477 (CPO 9) (Approved under the Consent Agenda)
CWS MO 11-22 1.b. Award Contract to Purchase a Fine Bubble Air Diffusion System for the Hillsboro Wastewater Treatment Facility Aeration Basin Modifications Project No. 6373 to the Lowest Responsible Bidder (CPO 9) (Pulled from under the Consent Agenda)
CWS MO 11-23 1.c. Award Contract to Purchase Primary Clarifier Drive Units for the Hillsboro Wastewater Treatment Facility Aeration Basin Modifications Project No. 6373 to the Lowest Responsible Bidder (CPO 9) (Approved under the Consent Agenda)
CWS MO 11-24 1.d. Award Contract to Purchase Two Motor Control Centers for the Hillsboro Wastewater Treatment Facility Aeration Basin Modifications Project No. 6373 to the Lowest Responsible Bidder (CPO 9) (Pulled from the Consent Agenda)
CWS MO 11-25 1.e. Award Contract to Purchase a Motor Control Center and Four Variable Frequency Drives for the Hillsboro Wastewater Treatment Facility Influent Pump Station (Project No. 6362) to Crescent Electric Supply, Inc. (CPO 9) (Approved under the Consent Agenda)
1.f. CWS MO 11-26 Award Contract to Purchase Sanitary Sewer TV Inspection and Sealing Unit to Aries Industries, Inc. (Approved under the Consent Agenda)
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
MO 11-29 g. Approve Agreement with Oregon Department of Transportation for Right of Way Services for the Old Highway 47 Bridge Replacement Project (CPO 11) (Approved under the Consent Agenda)
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MO 11-30 h. Establish March Board of Commissioners Meeting Schedule (CPO All) (Approved under the Consent Agenda)
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
MO 11-31 i. Approve Contract Amendment with Oregon Department of Human Services for Oregon Healthy Kids Outreach (Approved under the Consent Agenda)
SUPPORT SERVICES
MO 11-32 j. Amend the 2010-2011 Washington County Position and Salary Report Increasing the Number of Authorized Positions By 1.0 FTE in Office of Community Development (Pulled from the Agenda)
2. ORAL COMMUNICATION (2 MINUTE OPPORTUNITY)
Joe Rayhawk, 15248 NW Germantown Rd., spoke about long-term needs for education and jobs. Mr. Rayhawk hoped the Board would address the need to include West Bull Mountain and North Bethany land into urban reserves where land development can be exchanged for good jobs and for educational needs. He provided a handout with articles to support his concerns reflected on living in St. Louis with population changes that have contributed to deterioration in this region. He hoped the County would avoid similar problems in our region.
3. LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
MO 11-28 3.a. Provide Design Direction to Staff and Authorize Staff to Proceed with Final Design and Implementation of the NW Bethany Boulevard (NW Bronson Drive to NW West Union Road) Project (CPO 7)
Andrew Singelakis, LUT Director provided the staff report with Gary Stockhoff, Capital Project Manager. He stated that the Board’s action this date is not part of their normal approval process for roadway development. The next action would be part of the Declaration of Necessity phase where staff would have authority to acquire right-of-way. Given the controversy, staff felt it was prudent for the Board to provide guidance for the Bethany Blvd. project or its reconsideration. Mr. Singelakis asserted it was a fair question as right-of-way impact associated with this project may be considered severe enough to warrant reconsideration. Three options were identified: 1) Move forward with a 4 or 5 lane design consistent with the County’s Transportation Plan. 2) Move forward with a 3 lane design interim improvement which implies the project would widen later. 3) Hold the project until new information is gathered and the Transportation Plan is updated in 2012.
Gary Stockhoff, LUT Capital Projects Manager, introduced a PowerPoint presentation which included a video simulation of various options for the Bethany Boulevard improvements. He noted that the 5 lane option has 700 vehicles more per hour and that it did not demonstrate cars backing up on the highway. The model did reflect widening of the overpass and an additional lane on the connecting road. The simulated model was viewed and capacity improvements noted. The differences of the alternatives at the interchange ramp and overpass were highlighted. Demonstration of 2035 projected traffic with the overpass were illustrated which included the network of roads. Mr. Stockhoff noted that the current day traffic totals and increasing population continues to warrant the need for a 4 or 5 lane improvement. He reported the public involvement process has been extensive with lots of participation. The issues of concern were summarized as follows:
- impacts to property - impacts to mature trees and vegetation - impacts to neighborhood cohesion and livability - noise and air impacts - more travel lanes would create an undesirable pedestrian facility - using incorrect forecasting data (growth model) - more travel lanes would create a “concrete canyon” - need to identify other transportation alternatives rather than just building more lanes for vehicles - building roads for future developments that haven’t been built yet
The traffic volume analysis findings were depicted with the 2010 count of median speed compared for a variety of functions depending on number of side streets and driving interruptions for both 3 and 5 lane options.
Commissioner Malinowski asked about the year 2000 traffic counts. Mr. Stockhoff indicated that the range was approximately 18,000 vehicles per day. He thought some may have found other routes as the interchange has reached a static level. Commissioner Malinowski asked about calming traffic plans should there be a need to keep speeds at 35 mph. Mr. Stockhoff responded that because the arterial’s purpose was to move traffic that enforcement would be primarily through traffic enforcement activities.
Traffic counts for various locations were discussed for this project and other County traffic counts distinguished. Andrew Singelakis mentioned that traffic calming and landscaping treatments would also be discussed later and help with traffic speeds. Commissioner Schouten asked about other functions such as the bicycle and pedestrian amenities associated with the project.
Commissioner Terry asked about ODOT funds and it was confirmed that the overpass was to be funded by the County. Mr. Singelakis stated that the competitive bidding environment allowed for the $9 million needed from MSTIP project funds. Other design discussions including median, mid-block turns, and traffic flow configurations of the alternatives were discussed. It was confirmed that the models would work the same with the exception of minor intersections. The major difference would be the amount of right- of-way needed. The shift to the west reduced these amounts significantly and comparisons between alternatives were noted. Construction estimates were also shown on a slide (Right-of-Way costs not included).
Mr. Stockhoff walked through the Alternative adjustments to reduce impacts. He began with 2A. He noted the Cross Section diagrams and mentioned the following:
- 35 mph lower design speed minimizing impacts to housing - Reduced bike and travel lanes by one foot and center lane by two feet - Installed left turn lanes intersections at Avondale, Oak Hills and Telshire with Oak Hills as the only signalized intersection of the three noted. - Concrete barrier restricting traffic at the following intersections: Emily, Audrey and Ridgetop
Alternative 4 still centered on existing right-of-way with impacts at the widening of intersections as minimal. A summary of the Impacts of Right-of-Way were outlined on a PowerPoint slide and Alternative 2A (31% reduction) was highlighted. Discussion of the Beaverton School District needs for addressing cross walk designs were mentioned and determined addressable in a subsequent phase design.
Additional slides of the current vs. projected peak hour (average daily traffic) volumes were highlighted. Mr. Stochoff stated that the design of a 3 lane roadway would only be functional for 7 years and suggested it would not be a good investment. Commissioner Schouten asked about the hours that would be affected by peak traffic. Mr. Stockhoff stated that the policy design was for peak afternoon traffic when conditions are most severe. The assumptions of the current Transportation Plan were confirmed. Commissioner Schouten asked about the estimates of air quality and noise in the numbers. Mr. Stockhoff stated that through the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Metro runs a model of air quality analysis for the region. The County then uses this information to ensure compliance. He reported that noise study numbers are being finalized and federal regulations are also being followed to consider the impacts and sound measures.
Three Board options were noted:
1. Move forward with a 4 or 5 lane design that is consistent with the County’s Transportation Plan; or 2. Move forward with a 3-lane design as an “interim” project; or 3. Put the project on hold until new transportation demand model information is available as part of the Transportation Plan update.
He noted that a larger update will be taking place in 2014 when greenhouse gases (HB 2001) would require looking at denser population projections. This process will involve new information and numbers.
The options were highlighted:
Option No. 1: 4 or 5 lane design consistent with the County’s Transportation Plan
- Meets current and future transportation needs for next 20-25 years; - Improve roadway safety and reduce congestion at Hwy 26 overpass and corridor; discourage cut-thru traffic in adjacent neighborhoods - Continuous facility for bicycles and pedestrians; - Restrict access at certain intersections (4-lane roadway only); - Takes advantage of favorable bidding environment.
Option No. 2: Move forward with 3 lane design as an “interim” project
- Some improvement to traffic flow and safety with a continuous center turn lane; - Continuous facilities for bicycles and pedestrians; - Impact some east side properties; - Not require sound walls; - Future build-out at additional impact to adjacent residents and expense to taxpayers - Future congestion at the interchange would exist due to limited number of vehicles able to flow on to Bethany Blvd. - Less likely to discourage cut-thru traffic in adjacent neighborhoods
Option No. 3: Put the project on hold until new transportation demand model information
- Delays improvements to current congestion; intersection safety issues and future transportation needs; - Delays provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities; - Transportation demand model update will not result in a different conclusion regarding roadway capacity needs - May result in higher project costs if delayed
Discussion ensued about the Transportation Update and changes in the way the County does business with new numbers and mandates (i.e., greenhouse gases). The Board inquired about any bicycle safety and qualitative differences under consideration, new numbers and any change in the density of North Bethany that impacts the design considerations. Andy Back addressed the technical and political implications of growth within a confined Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Redevelopment concepts to accommodate growth within the County would be determined in the next forecast.
Commissioner Rogers asked about Option 3 and the factors of cost differential in waiting. Mr. Stockhoff reported that the favorable bidding environment continues, and the target for Spring 2012 timeline was confirmed. With authorization, the overpass would be included and staff confirmed funding would follow this timeline. It was concluded that waiting for additional numbers would create a delay to Spring 2013. Gary Stockhoff indicated that if the westside alignment took place, then the eastside (1 lane) would be redone with any future design and approximately 1/3 the cost thrown away ($2.5-3 million dollars).
Commissioner Schouten asked about the density of the area and future development of town centers and regional centers. Andy Back addressed the density for the area and confirmed that this planning was true by policy. The zoning would allow for more density and Bethany Blvd as a corridor could be targeted for increased density.
Chairman Duyck stated that individuals would have 3-minutes to provide testimony and 10-minutes for groups. The Board set aside one hour to hear testimony and then would work toward a decision.
Representative Harker stated that he was voicing concerns and support for the neighborhoods most impacted by the Bethany Blvd. improvement. He asked the Board to consider the impact of the individuals and he suggested that there may be 2 options suitable. He stated that if the density isn’t likely, then the throw away may be an option to consider in order to protect individuals and to avoid negative impacts to homeowners. He hoped the Board would find a way to do this and entrusted their ability to do so.
Jim Zupancic, 5335 Meadows Rd., Suite 161, Lake Oswego, OR representing the 3not5 group presented a PowerPoint presentation and spoke regarding the Bethany Boulevard project. He thanked the Board for the process they were implementing. He noted the decision involved a number of elements, traffic engineer data and their expertise. As policy makers, he noted the Board need consider many other issues. Traffic efficiencies are important but it isn’t the entire game. He suggested the preservation and character of neighborhoods, minimizing the impacts on environment, cost to the owners and government, economic vitality, job creation impacts, fairness and the quality of life were also of concern. He suggested that the decision was not about a road but a transformation of established neighborhoods. He noted the neighborhoods and the number of people present who cared about the decision being made. He hoped the Board would consider not only the road, right-of-way and traffic counts, but the people and their quality of life.
Mr. Zupancic talked about the options before the Board. He noted that the 2-lane status quo which is not acceptable nor is the 5 lane expanded right-of-way either. Other options include waiting for an updated Transportation Plan, 4 lane option and the compromise option of a 3 lane option in the current right-of-way. It was suggested that a 4 lane option in the existing right-of-way that did not impact people greatly would not be a good solution. He likened this to the Santa Ana freeway where lanes are too narrow. Mr. Zupancic cited that the Transportation Plan is a “plan” and not a Constitution. He noted that this is often laid out a decade or more into the future and needs amended. He suggested that this organic document needs to be amended as circumstances change.
Mr. Zupancic referenced an empty chair between him and the next speaker that was intended for a transportation engineer, which he hoped to have present. He informed the Board that in order to have one present, he spoke to 5 reputable traffic engineering firms which were all unwilling to testify “against the County” because of the million dollar transportation contracts that are awarded by Washington County. He stated belief that the Board members were honorable people who believe in an open and deliberative process. He noted that the vast majority of County staff were also the same. Mr. Zupancic suggested that when an unnamed traffic engineer contacted the County, he was challenged in asking questions. He stated that the engineer chose not to be present because they feared retribution.
Mr. Zupancic quoted the following and stated that he would answer the questions that traffic engineers could and should have answered.
“The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government and to protect its free expression should be our first object.” - Thomas Jefferson.
Since traffic engineers were dissuaded from doing so he thought this didn’t reflect well on the process or the County. He hoped that everyone was above this and suggested it was not something the Board wanted.
The following questions were presented by Mr. Zupancic:
Question #1: “Are the conclusions of the traffic study and the Staff Report based upon sound assumptions?”
Mr. Zupanic recalled early algebra lessons: A=B, B=C, then A=C and conversely if A=B, B=C, then A=C. Mr. Zupancic stated that the Kittleson & Associates firm may be using the assumptions that are not accurate. He spoke not only as an advocate, but intended to provide evidence. Mr. Zupancic cited the following evidence of the North Bethany traffic will move east to West, rather than North to South. Metro data shows housing unit growth in North Bethany and West Union areas. He did not dispute the growth, but where it would actually grow. Metro data show major employment growth in the Hillsboro area west of housing unit growth. (A color map was provided that showed Metro Housing projection with household changes 2005-2030). He noted the highest growth areas and Oak Hills losing and areas of North Bethany growing. He mentioned that employment growth was to the west and that affected the way people move. This conflicted with staff data that had employment traffic moving to the south. He asked pondered why one would go down Bethany Blvd when one could go north or west to get home or to a business.
“Increased Congestion” is a Myth. Mr. Zupancic stated that daily volumes have stayed relatively consistent over the past year. Further investigation of the count data reveals that traffic flows during peak hours have also remained consistent from 2009 to 2010 a continued decade-long trend.
Question #2: “Does the staff’s traffic analysis assume unfunded and uncertain improvements to the Highway 26 overpass and ramps, which otherwise constitute a bottleneck?”
Chairman Duyck asked Mr. Zupancic to summarize as he was out of time.
Question #3: “What is the real cost to the taxpayers and the landowners?”
Question #4: “What is the impact of the proposed road on the safety of the area’s citizens?”
Question #5: What is the impact on the overall quality of life in Bethany?”
Question #6: “What is the impact on the economic vitality of the area?”
Question #7: “Is the proposed project fair to all concerned?”
Mr. Zupancic introduced the next 6 speakers and hoped to summarize at the end of their testimony.
Keith Blankenbaker, President, 3not5 Inc., 5413 169th Place, wanted to address questions regarding the underlying assumptions and project data that had been brought up during the last year. He asked, if the County’s Transportation Plan consistent with current transportation planning. He suggested that there was some delay in the County’s adoption of contemporary planning models. He wondered if the impacts of urban and rural reserves decisions were adequately considered in the projections for traffic volume. He noted few homes were included in Arbor Oaks than were noted in the Transportation Plan and he believed this was not calculated in the model. He wondered about the infill land that is not yet identified and he asked if the Claremont retirement community would be planning 10 trips per day as the model implies. He asked what route the new residents will likely take to jobs in Hillsboro. How much will the Bethany Village and the commercial development planned for North Bethany reduce traffic south of West Union? Mr. Blankenbaker said he felt there were inadequate answers provided to date and given there has been difficulty employing a traffic consultant, 3not5 is convinced that the data used is flawed and excessively high numbers (i.e. 39,000 traffic per day). He thought this number was seriously in question. He noted the design team insists that they build a road to address peak hour traffic. Mr. Blankenbaker stated that a senior scholar and principal researcher at RAND Corporation noted that 90% of our roads are uncongested for 90% of the time. He asked if there is a true need to build for peak hour traffic or if tolerating a little delay possible.
Mr. Blakenbaker recalled an April 2010 Email from LUT staff member, Matt Costigan. He quoted, “Currently Bethany has just under an average daily traffic of 20,000 and at specific times accommodates over 1600 vehicles per hour. A 3-lane road can only support the daily average traffic of 15,000 vehicles at a maximum of 1300 vehicles per hour.”
He asserted that the suggestion of a 3-lane road has less capacity than current 2-lane sub standard road did not make any sense. Further installation of roundabouts at West Union and Bronson have the potential to increase the capacity of a 3-lane road as much as 30- 40% and possibly 50%. Mr. Blankenbaker concluded by stating his organization’s belief that excessively high traffic volume projections, the under estimates of capacity on a 3 lane road, make it questionable on the need for a 5-lane road.
Norm Rose, 3075 NW 144th, Oak Hills Home Owner Association Board of Directors member spoke as a member of the Bethany Blvd. focus group. Mr. Rose suggested the real problem is the inherit problem of Hwy 26 congestion. He said the 3-lane highway is at its capacity and the existing overpass single turn lanes back up the intersection and beyond. This creates the gridlock experienced. He suggested the improvements north of the overpass will do little to eliminate the gridlock. He noted that ODOT has stated that the on ramps handle at best 900 vehicles per hour when traffic moves at the speed limit. LUT staff states this number is 1400. Whatever number is believed, he suggested that additional traffic will increase congestion on the on ramps. Mr. Rose mentioned the traffic lights at the on ramps are designed to regulate traffic flow during the peak hour traffic. Even with widening, on ramp volume will continue to cause gridlock. ODOT has confirmed there is no funding immediately available and a long-term solution is not on the radar. The County has agreed to find funds to complete this project. Mr. Rose thought the staff video was somewhat misleading as traffic is only shown at rush hour, doesn’t show the number of vehicles being moved and did not show the on ramp gridlock during these rush hours times. He also suggested that numbers representing non- automobile traffic or any effort to reduce peak hour traffic be provided. The basis for the project is solely made on peak hour traffic -- 1 hour in the a.m. and 1 hour in the p.m. Mr. Rose closed by asking the Board to consider all the material presented this evening.
Julie Doll, 15688 NW Melody Lane, expressed concern regarding the costs associated with the 4 to-5 lane road. She quoted the April 2010 estimate of $15.6 million for this project. LUT estimates 5-lanes, minus right-of-way and easements would be $9.3 million and 3-lanes at $6.3 million. She noted that $5.6 million was budgeted to acquire right-of- way and this amount has grown because steps were not taken to acquire it when homes were built. She noted that former Commissioner John Leeper approved the Bethany widening in 2005 believing that adequate right-of-way was available. She suggested none of this is the fault of taxpayers and homeowners who are being asked to shoulder the burden. Even though it is 30% of the budget – $5.6 million for right-of-way will likely prove insufficient. Homeowners will seek just compensation for their properties and a number of them have retained season legal counsel and will fight relentlessly. There is recognition that changes to existing right-of-way will damage the remainder value of their homes and owners will fight for offsetting compensation requiring the County to spend enormous sums on litigation and damages. This will drive project costs higher than estimated. Finally budgets do not include amounts to make the widening effective. This will take an additional $8-10 million in funding that has not been allocated. The absence could create traffic for decades to come. She asked if this is a good use of scarce funding and $16 million budget estimates will skyrocket requiring millions in additional funds and untold delays that does not deliver Hwy 26 improvements needed for an effective solution. Ms. Doll noted that major fiscal constraints with major projects at Bull Mountain, North Bethany and elsewhere still needed funds. Alternative solutions available requiring little or no right-of-way acquisitions (i.e., adding one lane to Bethany, 143rd and 178th to improve north-south traffic flow) would ensure better ways to spend taxpayer’s dollars.
Suzanne Walker, 3196 NW 157th Place, addressed safety issues. She noted that Bethany being a neighborhood community did not have any commercial centers, industry manufacturing or agricultural facilities. She suggested that the design for new residential Bethany Blvd, need to consider these points. She asked for a 3 lane design with a continuous 2 way left turn lane to protect drivers making left turns. Ms. Walker noted that 3 lanes would provide pedestrians a reasonable distance to cross when accessing the other side of their neighborhood. She cited that a study by the Highway Research Program gives strong evidence that a 3 lane with a center turn lane sees more than a 50% crash reduction compared with an undivided 4 lane road. Ms. Walker suggested that a timed traffic light at Bronson-Bethany intersection be considered. She noted that 130 homes from the White Fox and Sky View neighborhoods only have the perilous Bronson intersection as an outlet. Hundreds of the trips out of this area involve convoluted north bound routes to access points south. Residents demand the option to make a safe left turn onto Bethany. Lastly, Ms. Walker stated that Oak Hills Drive requires a traffic light and a school crossing designation. Nearly 300 children from the west side of Bethany attend Oak Hills School on the east side. The Beaverton School District has stated that if the Bethany is expanded to more than 3 lanes there is a need to have 3 costly bus routes because safety concerns -- even though most children live within walking distance of school. Traffic would move more smoothly with a timed traffic signal. Mid-block crossings must be created so that residents of the 9 neighborhoods can have safe access to both sides of their community and the TriMet bus stops. She asked these be located at Telshire Terrace, and the vicinity of Emily Lane. It was imperative that the design speed be limited to 35 miles per hour and protective sound walls be constructed to mitigate sound and to safeguard homes. Bethany traffic has demolished rear fences in the past. She hoped for security that the residents deserved. Ms. Walker asserted that active transportation must be given every consideration as the non motorized transportation portends a greater demand for bicycle lanes and sidewalks. She ended by stating that government is obligated to provide for all its citizens not only those behind the wheel of a car. Six foot bike lanes and 5’ sidewalks separated by a landscaping strip will encourage heavier use of non motorized transportation.
Robert Erickson, 15715 NW Oak Hills Drive, spoke about the livability issues at the heart of the concerns. He spoke about neighborhoods and people and the affect of a 4 lane road on the quality of life of the 9 neighborhoods served. Mr. Erickson noted that families chose these neighborhoods for the quality of life that is provided. He referred to the neighborhoods as a string of pearls threaded together by Bethany Blvd, which serves all neighborhoods. With 600 owner occupied homes, Oak Hills was the first and it is noted as the best affordable neighborhood in Oregon. He noted that 16 homes will lose their back and side yard and a canopy of trees will be impacted (168 mature trees). A 3 lane option would affect only ½ this number. He cited that the Pacific Northwest Research estimates that the existing tree canopy benefit totals $2.3 million. Bike paths and sidewalks to an improved 3 lane Bethany Blvd. will attract walkers, bike riders and families. A 4 to 5 lane road with higher speed increased traffic and a much more dangerous roadway to cross would discourage such activity. The region’s quality of life is also dependent on the quality of air. With the goal of reducing green house gases by 75% of the 1990 levels by 2050, it will depend on the County’s leadership. Building a 4 to 5 lane highway is not compatible with this goal. The noise would increase the decibels to a range 58-74 decibels. He compared this to an air conditioner (60 decibels at 6’). Increased noise levels will have a negative impact on the quality of life and the decision a lasting impact on the livable family friendly neighborhoods that represent the best the county has to offer. Selecting a 4 or 5 lane road would forever reduce the quality of life now enjoyed.
Gary Cooper, 15725 NW Perimeter Drive, addressed the Board on the economic vitality of the Bethany area. He noted the city of Issaquah, WA as an example. They have developed an economic strategy that encourages the growth and development that supports and complements the town’s quality of life. This includes providing quality natural settings and preserving a small town atmosphere. This is accomplished by balancing growth and development by minimizing damage to the quality of environment, community and economy. Mr. Cooper suggested that a 4 or 5 lane road does not meet these strategies. He applauded Mr. Roy Kim in keeping the economic vitality strategies in place. He noted these best neighborhood designs in a natural and healthy environment that seeks to bring people together in a unique lifestyle around a well planned walkable neighborhood of human scale. He expressed appreciation of Mr. Kim support for the existing 3 lane Bethany Blvd that moves traffic smoothly. He indicated Mr. Kim’s support of the same from West Union to Bronson that will achieve these purposes.
Mr. Cooper noted that at the February 8th Work Session, Commissioner Terry asked about the commercial traffic and it was indicated that it was limited to servicing Bethany Village – less than 5% of the traffic volume. Mr. Cooper stated that a 4 or 5 lane road does not contribute to livability and a sense of community along Bethany Blvd. A reduction in values by $50,000 for each home in the 9 neighborhoods has been estimated and the additional depression of home prices, will hit homeowners when they are already down. He concluded by stating the larger design would not be compatible with the economic vitality.
Micki Sparr, 15390 NW Wooded Way, spoke on Fairness. Ms. Sparr noted the first homes in Oak Hills were sold in 1965. The 650 homes were completed well before the 1998 County Transportation Plan was adopted. This first planned community in Oregon has homes clustered around an elementary school, church and recreation facility and 30 acres of commonly owned green space. The homes that border the east side of Bethany Blvd are just 25’ from the road’s centerline. Melody Lane was the site of the 1978 Street of Dreams and part of the White Fox neighborhood. This neighborhood’s homes were built 30’ from the centerline in accordance with the standards of that time. The Telshire neighborhood of the 1980s has the same standards. Ms. Sparr noted the neighborhoods on the west side of Bethany Blvd. have 45’ set backs from the centerline and were built after 1988. She suggested County Planners knew there was insufficient set backs on the east side of Bethany Blvd and should have required 50-60’ set back on the west side so east side residents would not be harmed. In fairness to existing residents, steps should have been taken to protect them. She further asserted that it was unfair for one road to be the only north-south route in and out of a densely populated area. Additional traffic corridors should been planned for and developed. She also noted the on and off ramps at Murray would not extend a corridor further north on Murray and 173rd was noted as a future overpass. Poor planning has caused blocking the connection straight through to Springville Road. She suggested that more traffic corridors provide more choices and reduce congestion. In an interest of fairness to all, the burden of growth should be spread over a wider area. Ms. Sparr closed by stating that the livability of existing neighborhoods would be severely impaired to provide a slightly improved commute time for future rush hour traffic.
Jim Zupancic finalized the 3not5 group’s position and asked that the Board approve the project within the current right-of-way. This would include sound walls of the size and style north of West Union Road, pedestrian and bicycle elements. He asked the Board to not delay but to make a decision and resolution that makes no room for interpretation or discretion. Mr. Zupancic suggested the 3not5 group has conducted themselves with decorum and have appropriately exercised a democratic process. He suggested that the right decision was not a throw away option, but a Solomon’s option – the wise choice.
John Leeper, 11160 SW Muirwood, addressed the Board as a and recalled that when he was a Board member a senior County staff member stated there was enough right-of-way on Bethany Blvd to build a 5-lane road. Regarding the project underway, Mr. Leeper stated his support for Alternative 2-A and Option 1. He felt this would be the best use of County funds for road improvements. He also stated that the amount of time spent in research and study of the project has brought the County closed to paralysis through analysis. He closed by asking the Board get off the dilemma wheel and to make a decision.
Chairman Duyck expressed his appreciation of Mr. Leeper’s candid words.
Lynne McIntyre, 9565 SW Washington, Portland spoke in favor of the 3not5’s recommendation for Bethany Blvd road improvements. As a realtor, she brought a concern to the discussion involving project manager, Matt Costigan. Ms. McIntyre stated that in 2009 he was her only source of information prior to accessing information on the County’s web site. Mr. Costigan acknowledged this and she continued to report problems in accessing information as she was helping her son purchase his first home. The property is located at 15770 NW Oak Hills Drive and backs Bethany Blvd. Mr. Costigan stated that if the County were to need property, it would likely be five feet or less on the Bethany Blvd side. She made it clear that it was her son and asked if it were his son, what he would advise. Ms. McIntyre reported he offer was made and the property purchased in January 2010. Survey crews working near the home confirmed that no property would be needed. Soon after, her son attended an open house and discovered the County’s 5-lane road plans. At a recent open house, Ms. McIntyre told Mr. Costigan that she was disappointed and that her son would suffer. She reminded him of the 2009 discussion and as a realtor she received incorrect information that affected her client and son. She had hoped that the County staff could be trusted and Mr. Costigan denied the conversation took place and he would have never said such things. Ms. McIntyre asserted that she would swear that the conversation did take place and also expressed disappointment that there was never an apology. Ms. McIntyre recommended that the County delay the project until Fall and move the centerline to the true center to benefit the east side of Bethany Blvd. She also asked that the County install 8’ sound walls to properties backing Bethany Blvd, wrap the corners to outlets (i.e., Oak Hills Drive) and to select a 3 lane option. If a 4 lane road is built, then using the narrowest possible lanes so that impacted properties have no land taken. She ended by asking the Board consider the community and those on or around Bethany Blvd. The majority had spoken clearly and the correct road option is 3 lanes. Driving down property values for the next 25 years is poor planning by the County.
Chairman Duyck acknowledged Ms. McIntyre’s letter was in the record.
Mike Appling, 3040 NW 144th, Oak Hills resident recognized that the decision was political and had to do with the neighborhood’s livability. After listening to Ms. Sparr, he understood more about the Board’s decisions regarding growth, zoning and density of the population. He expressed that there was a decision to chop off people’s neighborhood based on the bad decisions of the past. He ended by asking the Board not penalize neighborhoods because of poor decisions made previously.
Jonathan Schlueter, Westside Economic Alliance Executive Director, a non-profit business advocacy organization serving public sector agencies and private sector employers in Washington County and Western Clackamas County stated his group’s effort to promote economic development and enhance livability on the west side of the region. He noted that transportation is a high priority for residents and a growing source of frustration if one cannot get somewhere by the means chosen. As the economic engine for the state, he noted that transportation matters. It is imperative for workers to get to jobs and products to distribution centers in the afternoon. Students need to get to schools and college classes while healthcare facilities are important to those needing transit services and other amenities. These factors make the county a desirable place to live. Mr. Schlueter cited that Senator Ron Wyden has stated that you cannot have a first rate economy with a second rate transportation system. In 1987, the County voters created the MSTIP program, which has been endorsed twice since. He noted that no other county has this program. For the last twenty years, improvements to Bethany Blvd have been a priority of the MSTIP program and it is imperative that the County honor this project and deliver the planned improvements as Bethany Blvd near capacity for several hours each day. Moving residents north-south at this location is difficult. Congestion hurts the economy and jeopardizes public safety and limits modal choice by restricting public transit access of bicycle and pedestrian mobility in this area. Referencing population growth, Mr. Schlueter illustrated the population of the county in his handout. Transportation is important and it will occur in neighborhoods as we have policy to not expand beyond the Urban Growth Boundary into rural portions of the county. The density, infill and reclamation of existing areas are a reality and declared policy. Washington County must not invest in congestion. Mr. Schlueter stated his organization’s support of Option 1 – the 5-lane alternative. If not, Mr. Schlueter suggested the Board not spend the money in this corridor as it is a waste of public funds and there are a number of deserving projects.
Achod Goganian, 2720 NW Forest Ave., Oak Hills stated his concern for the irreversible impact to neighborhoods and region with a 5 lane option. He highlighted points from his submission to the record. Mr. Goganian stated that the staff’s plan for the community of distinction raises the bar and marginalizes established neighborhoods and historic resources. It also bisects a school district boundary with a 4 or 5 lane road and 8’ high sound barriers. He suggested that any plan an 8’ high sound barrier sends a red flag and is not the right approach but would present a compound of distinction and be ugly. Mr. Goganian mentioned a chart at the open house depicted the impact to historic resources as “no impact.” A letter to the County from the State Historic Preservation Office was sent that identifies Oak Hills as a potential listing for the National Registry of Historic Places. He also expressed concern that the small strip provided for bike lanes. As a bike commuter, he noted that most people are not willing to ride on Cornell. He suggested that multi-modal needs to be built for regular people. He hoped that arterials in neighborhoods be considered 3 lanes with planting strips separating pedestrians from cars and preferably separating cyclists. Mr. Goganian suggested that these changes may get people out of cars to use alternative modes. He closed stating that the Bethany Blvd. project is not only trees, neighborhoods and homes but an approach to designing for growth and supporting regional goals to protect the resources and values of livability. A 4 or 5 lane road is easy way out for the Board and is burdensome. He hoped for consideration of future neighborhoods everyone can be proud of.
John, Hartsock, 16550 SW Merlo Rd. representing Beaverton School District addressed the concern of a signal at Oak Hills. He was available to answer questions. Commissioner Malinowski asked if the school district could work with 5 lanes and whether having the sidewalk on the other side of the bike path would be a preference. Mr. Hartsock stated that anything making it safer is appreciated. He noted the District is continually looking for new walking routes to school. Because of the speed of 5 lanes (potentially 35 mph) that crossings guards are needed. A number of students live on the west side of Bethany and any engineering considerations would be appreciated. Mr. Harstock also noted that traffic calming would help along with any signal.
Commissioner Malinowski suggested the Beaverton School District consider attendance boundaries so not to cross 5 lane roads if possible. He suggested it would be sending students to cross a creek full of alligators. Chairman Duyck asked that the Beaverton School District stay involved with whatever is decided and that their input would be helpful. Mr. Hartsock confirmed that he would stay in touch during the process. Commissioner Schouten asked about a 5 lane road and if buses would be used. He asked if parents were likely to drive students. Mr. Hartsock stated the situation varies by conditions, time of year and whether parents feel the neighborhood is safe. Crossing guards at a controlled intersection also makes a difference and time will tell the results. He noted some parents were concerned with a 3 lane option. He also confirmed that in the absence of buses, traffic lights and guards that parents tend to drive their children. Commissioner Terry asked about a narrower 4 lane with a bike lane on the other side of the sidewalk and whether this option would make a difference in considering busing. Due to the left turn lane, Mr. Hartsock thought the crossing may still be considered a 5 lane although the narrowness may be a shorter distance with the engineering.
Brooke Bryant, 15500 NW Norwich Circle, Oak Hills stated her involvement with the 3not5 group and came to the meeting with an open mind. She stated that living in a society for 70 years she witnessed struggles, depression and loss of faith in the political process. She stated belief that party names are overused and obscure basic human values. Ms. Bryant stated the Board had a unique opportunity to restore faith in people within the county by making a choice that reflects the real opinions of the people in the Bethany Blvd. neighborhoods. She suggested that people would prefer to drive a few more minutes to a corridor than to have their neighborhoods affected in the way the 4 or 5 lane change would bring. Ms. Bryant asked the Board to restore the faith of the people and that regardless of who placed commissioners into office that this was a matter of real human values and consideration of the whole picture.
Ron Crutcher, 15089 NW Dominion Drive thanked the Board for their careful and deliberate decision. He suggested it was more than just running a road up to North Bethany and applauded the residents in bringing the problem to the Board in force. As a real estate broker (34 years) Mr. Crutcher decidedly moved his family to the area for the quality of life in the neighborhood. He suggested that due to the economic conditions and speculation of the Bethany Blvd improvements, property values have plummeted. He noted the “infamous Bethany House” is listed $80,000 – 90K less due to the fact that the sellers do not know what is going to happen. Mr. Crutcher asked the Board stop the bleeding and dismiss the options that are publicly causing so much devastation as the negative speculation is hurting the area.
Eight additional people signed up and did not get to testify as the Board went beyond the one hour allotted to this agenda item.
Andrew Singelakis reaffirmed that staff stood behind their recommendation to the Board.
Commissioner Malinowski stated that he was not intending to vote for a 3 lane interim. He expressed concern in waiting for more information in light of the value of the community. He suggested that if things were done differently, then the decision would not have been so difficult. Given his predecessors set things up, he provided the following motion:
Approve a 3 lane (interim) moving Bethany Blvd’s center to the west.
Motion – Malinowski 2nd – Schouten Vote: 2-3 No: (Rogers, Terry, Duyck)
Commissioner Malinowski hoped this proposal could go forward. He recognized this would be a $2 – 3 million risk and that this valuable community is owed something to avoid ripping through one area to get to the next great real estate opportunity. Commissioner Malinowski suggested this could be highly destructive and hoped the numbers would come in better not worse. If there was any chance that good transportation could be provided without ripping through the neighborhood, then this should be done. He noted that this was independent of this project being in his district and about 10% of what is budgeted each year for MSTIP. He expressed this was worth the risk and the County owed it to the people. When more information is known in a year, then other alternatives could be worked out. He hoped that the improvement project would not be in anyone’s back yard and that kids could safely cross the street to other neighborhoods.
Commissioner Schouten stated his interest in furthering the motion but would prefer a delay for a period of time in 2012. He stated that traffic engineers willingly or unwillingly have created this transportation system and noted that we did not need to address every moment of peak time as other cities in the world have developed differently with extraordinarily vital success. The length of density and traffic generation is not as obvious and some dense areas may have less motor vehicle traffic. He suggested thinking more about making County dollars go further.
Commissioner Terry commented that he was fearful of the fact that one error has been made and that a second one is not needed. He referred to Mr. Zupanic’s math illustration and provided his own (2+2=4) as noted other variables equal 4 as well.
Commissioner Rogers stated he would not be able to support the motion as a $2-3 million throw away is way too much. The 3 lane alternative without sound walls is not fair to the community. To add them and then throw them away did not make sense either. He took the citizens seriously and as a representative of the County he did not represent just an area or neighborhood. Commissioner Rogers confirmed he represented county-wide residents and future generations also. He noted that he was convinced that there are 19,000+ ADT (average daily traffic counts) and by 2024 a 3 lane option would be obsolete making this a very temporary solution.
A call for the question and vote was for Commissioner Malinowski’s motion was determined failed.
Commissioner Schouten made a motion to direct staff to discontinue the project until further information is provided and the Transportation Plan is updated.
Motion – Schouten 2nd – Malinowski Vote: 2-3 (No: Rogers, Terry, Duyck)
Commissioner Terry called for the motion and the motion failed.
Commissioner Schouten suggested that a lot of information had yet to be developed and the question of trade off and gold plate standards is something that needs to be studied further. He suggested the County is at odds in transportation planning and that we cannot continue to do things as done the last 30-40 years. There is a need to do things smarter with how money is spent and how the long list of transportation projects will be funded. Commissioner Schouten noted that the $2.5 billion of projects needed would not be gold plated and that more time would benefit all.
Chairman Duyck weighed in on the motion by stating that a 3 lane option was not a good transportation system. In voting for MSTIP, it was the whole system that was voted on and a 3 lane option would not get the desired result. He noted that he didn’t like a 5 lane option either, but that doing nothing was not an option and a 4 lane option would increase capacity. He suggested the motion on the floor would do nothing and only delay the project and that delaying would not improve property values only provide more uncertainty. Chairman Duyck noted that the overpass funding was needed to move now and to not delay as the window of favorable bidding opportunities may close. He suggested making the decision and to move forward with mitigation as much as possible to preserve neighborhood livability. He concluded that it this option would not solve the problem of moving traffic and he could not support the delay.
Commissioner Terry made a motion to direct staff with the final design and implementation of the Bethany Blvd. Project Alternative 2-A (a 4 lane option) and to limit the widening of the Bethany overpass.
Motion – Terry 2nd – Rogers Vote: 3-2 (No: Schouten, Malinowski)
Chairman Duyck stated the motion passed.
Commissioner Terry thanked the 3not5 committee for handling themselves well and acknowledged this affected the audience’s place of living and businesses. Upon traveling this Bethany Blvd, he came to his conclusion by asking a lot of questions of staff. He expressed struggle in making the right decision and it was unfortunate that a mistake was made in the past. Commissioner Terry did not want to see another error made. He noted that Alternative 2-A was a 4 lane option that would impact 0 homes from a stand point of having to take houses off the market.
Chairman Duyck thanked Commissioner Terry for adding the need to disrupt the neighborhood only one time if avoidable. Commissioner Terry asked staff to consider moving the bike path to the other side of the sidewalk, providing the curb to protect pedestrians and making the multi-modal safer while keeping the topiary in place. Andrew Singelakis stated staff would provide a response to this option.
Commissioner Rogers clarified the motion to was to adopt Alternative 2-A and asked about the freeway overpass work planned for the same time. He thanked the public for their involvement and stated he planned to vote for a delay. In getting his questions answered, he discovered this would not accomplish what he had hoped. In voting for the 2-A alternative, he wanted to know more about traffic calming efforts. Commissioner Rogers noted it was a difficult decision and that he did not take this matter lightly.
Chairman Duyck asked about the two projects being tied together with the overpass being added. Andrew Singelakis confirmed that the Washington County Coordinating Committee would be notified on the change.
Commissioner Schouten finalized his comments by stating that inertia provides for making wider roads and to defer to traffic engineers. He suggested that the quality of life and land use issues sometimes get neglected by density issues and traffic generation caused by motor vehicles. He noted that other areas (i.e. downtown Vancouver B.C.) has density that created opportunities for other modes of transportation. Commissioner Schouten expressed concern that the locked thinking of the last 30-40 years made changing from a 4 lane option difficult whether we like it or not. At the risk of sounding like a sore loser, he reaffirmed that transportation needs to be done differently in land use or disappointing votes and undesired outcomes will continue.
Chairman Duyck reconfirmed the motion passed on a 3-2 vote.
4. ORAL COMMUNICATION
Tom Black, 870 Garibaldi Street, Hillsboro spoke concerning the continuation of the ordination on Urban and Rural Reserves. He addressed the Board regarding the fact many cannot make it to meetings other than the evening. Mr. Black mentioned that the upcoming Planning Commission meeting on March 2 is not a meeting he could make at 1:30 p.m. Due to the constraints this does not allow for public testimony other than submitting letters or email. He noted that the reserves map is a draft (December 14) and the IGA is not endorsed so having the planning commission approve this matter was premature. He hoped the Board would allow for more evening meetings so there is opportunity for comment. Mr. Black suggested this was not a way to run public meetings. He hoped for vision and community involvement of this 50-year plan. Chairman Duyck clarified that on March 15th there may be an agreement between Metro and Washington County. The ordinance would likely become engrossed and a public meeting is scheduled on the evening of March 29 to allow for public involvement. Commissioner Terry thanked Mr. Black for his concerns.
Russ Dondero, 1506 Limpus Lane, spoke on behalf of the process. He noted that the tough decision this date drew people who care about their community and as he watched the process he hoped to see more involvement in the County. Mr. Dondero noted that some of the Board’s business is done without people being present and watching on the public access channels is not the same. He expressed that is why he travels to Salem to be with legislators and fellow citizens and he hoped to be a resource on a variety of issues confronting the County. Mr. Dondero noted that the Board gets elected every meeting and he hoped they would keep this in mind as the conduct their work.
Commissioner Malinowski asked that 3not5 group stay involved in the planning process for the 4 lane option. He encouraged they work toward getting the things desired and to work within the framework – especially with regard to bike lanes, and school district needs. Commissioner Malinowski noted the Transportation Plan would come up next year and the needs of the greater neighborhood can be expressed then. He also addressed LUT staff and mentioned that the stories involving 6 different road engineers and feelings of being threatened were concerning. He suggested outside engineers could provide excellent opportunities where things could be done differently. The need to ensure others are not terrified to go against the County was important. He noted that because of his position on the Board, it was not fair for him to cause intimidation and that staff needed to avoid misunderstandings in the future.
Andrew Singelakis stated his belief that any traffic engineer working with a community group would never be discouraged. He asserted that if a professional traffic engineer was working with the 3not5 group, it would have been easier to synthesize the information. Commissioner Malinowski suggested that staff is told to treat those smaller with gentleness.
Commissioner Schouten stated that there are issues of flexibility and need to reflect others concerns. He hoped the County would recognize other forms of transportation within economic development. He expressed the turnout and civility for the meeting was a good show of a democratic process.
Commissioner Rogers affirmed that the need for multi-modal transportation was in discussion and the need for keeping the Urban Growth Boundary tight will require decisions on moving people onto wider roads at times. He noted the difficult decision before the Board and the 4 lane configuration with retaining walls, set backs, landscaping, lighting, and pedestrian crossing decisions will allow for more community involvement.
Chairman Duyck closed by commending Commissioner Schouten for his tireless advocacy for alternative modes of transportation. He noted that the debate in the region is to what degree we restrict automobile methods of travel in order to achieve other modes of transportation. Since we are not the same as Europe, then the situation requires evaluation to what degree we do this. He noted the way the County thinks about bike and pedestrian lanes is changing. Commissioner Schouten suggested that growth will subject everyone to not do business the same as the last 30-40 years and it mandates different approaches. Commissioner Terry respected and appreciated multi-modal forms also and noted that countries like The Netherlands have had bicycles in the mix for a long time and they still have gridlock. He envisioned that with the improvement of electric cars, advancements will require changes and yet roads will be important and two lane improvements not desirable.
5. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
6. ADJOURNMENT: 9:25 p.m.
Motion – Schouten 2nd – Rogers Vote – 5-0
MINUTES APPROVED THIS ____ DAY ______2011
______RECORDING SECRETARY CHAIRMAN
MINUTES
WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
APRIL 26, 2011
CONVENED: 6:31 p.m.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Chair Andy Duyck Vice Chair Roy Rogers Commissioner Dick Schouten Commissioner Greg Malinowski (Arrived 6:34 p.m.) Commissioner Bob Terry
STAFF: Rob Massar, Assistant County Administrator Dan Olsen, County Counsel Andrew Singelakis, Director, LUT Brent Curtis, Planning Division Manager, LUT Aisha Willits, Senior Planner, LUT Steve Kelley, Senior Planner, LUT Joanne Rice, Principal Planner, LUT Sheriff Rob Gordon Nora Curtis, Engineering Division Manager, CWS Linda Gray, CPO Coordinator Jim Thiessen, Audiovisual Technician Barbara Hejtmanek, Recording Secretary
PRESS: Dana Tims, The Oregonian
1. CONSENT AGENDA
Chair Duyck announced the following modifications to the Consent Agenda:
There is award of bid on item 1.a. to Emery & Sons Construction, Inc. in the amount of $7,969,975.27. On item 1.b., the purchase price for “B” is $260,000 and for “C” 160,000. There is award of bid on item 1.e. to Northwest Earthmovers, Inc. in the amount of $4,781,215.98. There is award of bid on item 1.l. to Baker Rock Resources in the amount of $1,141,341.85. An off docket item from the Board of Commissioners entitled “Schedule Board Work Session on May 18, 2011” is added to the Consent Agenda. (MO 11-93)
It was moved to adopt the Consent Agenda, as modified.
Motion – Rogers 2nd – Terry Vote – 4-0 (Malinowski away at time of vote)
CLEAN WATER SERVICES
1.a. CWS MO 11-44 Award Contract to Construct the North Plains Pump Station Relocation Project No. 6387 to the Lowest Responsible Bidder (CPO 5) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.b. CWS MO 11-45 Approve the Purchase of Real Property and Authorize General Manager or His Designee to Sign Appropriate Documents (CPO 11) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.c. CWS MO 11-46 Approve the Purchase of Real Property and Authorize General Manager or His Designee to Sign Appropriate Documents (CPO 11) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.d. CWS MO 11-47 Authorize General Manager to Pay $50,000 Self-Insured Retention toward Claim No. 11- 27 to Special District’s Insurance Services (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
1.e. MO 11-89 Approve Bid Award, Execute Contract and Authorize for Construction of Improvements to NW 185th Avenue between Westview High School and NW West Union Road (CPO 7) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.f. MO 11-90 Approve Contract Amendment No. 1.0 with David Evans and Associates for Construction Engineering for the Brookwood Avenue Project from TV Highway to East Main Street (CPO 9) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.g. RO 11-27 Authorize Traffic Impact Fee Annual Adjustment (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.h. RO 11-28 Amend the 2010-2011 Work Program (All CPOs) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.i. MO 11-91 Authorize Contract for Asset Management Software Acquisition (All CPOs) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
SUPPORT SERVICES
1.j. MO 11-92 Sale of Property Described as 1N4170001700 to Adjacent Property Owner (CPO 13) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
SERVICE DISTRICT FOR LIGHTING NO. 1-A COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
1.k. SDL RO 11-4 Form Assessment Area, Authorize Maximum Annual Assessment and Impose a First Year Assessment for St. Pius X Catholic Church (CPO 1) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
URBAN ROAD MAINTENANCE DISTRICT-A COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
1.l. URMD MO 11-1 Approve Bid Award and Execute Contract for the 2011 Urban Road Maintenance District Overlay Project (All CPOs) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
2. ORAL COMMUNICATION (2 MINUTE OPPORTUNITY)
John Forster, 5905 SW Looking Glass Drive, Gaston, Oregon, said that he is a beneficiary of the work of TVWD and CWS, as he lives downstream from Hagg Lake. He wanted to offer any help he can to survive or benefit from the collapse of the U.S. banking dollar that is in progress. Mr. Forster observed that Clean Water Services has a lot of capital storage and similar issues in the rest of the county. He stated that the dollar is getting close to the end of its useful life. Mr. Forster said that as a student of economics, he knows approximately how that is going to happen and as a student of theology, he understands why it is going to happen. He stated that the Bible says that when you see your neighbor’s ox wandering away, you do what you can to bring it back to him. Mr. Forster was aware that there are regulations that prevent using the money to store value that we have used for 5,000 years—mostly silver. He said that these rules make it illegal to escape what is coming as far as the hyperinflation that we are in for is concerned. Mr. Forster stated that what was supposed to prevent risk and loss now guarantees it. He said that city and county officials will be coming to a moral crisis point where their responsibility for those under their direction will contradict directives coming down from the federal level. Mr. Forster again committed to being available to offer any responsive resources he can for the stewardship decisions the Board will have to make regarding various kinds of capital storage in the years to come.
3. PROCLAMATION 3.a. MO 11-85 Proclaim May 2011 as Older Americans Month
The Clerk of the Board read the proclamation into the record.
Jeff Hill appeared as representative of the Aging & Veterans Services Advisory Committee and read a statement on their behalf. He said that every May since 1963, people in towns and cities across the country have come together to celebrate the enormous contributions of older Americans. Mr. Hill stated that Older Americans Month is the chance to show appreciation and support of seniors as they continue to enrich and strengthen our communities. He said that this year’s theme—Connecting the Community—pays homage to many ways in which older adults bring inspiration and continuity to the fabric of our communities. Mr. Hill stated that their shared histories, diverse experiences, and wealth of knowledge have made our culture, economy and local character what they are today. He said that older Americans are, in fact, more active in community life than ever before, thanks in part to advances in health care, education, technology and financial stability over the last several decades that have greatly increased our vitality and standard of living. Mr. Hill stated that older adults are out and about, giving back and making a difference in their community. He said that older Americans step up to help one another as well. Mr. Hill reported that in our community, seniors volunteer by delivering meals, helping with home repair, assisting with shopping and offering companionship, counseling and care. He said that their efforts remind us that when older adults are active and engaged in their communities, everyone benefits. Mr. Hill stated that the Aging & Veterans Services Advisory Committee would like to thank the Board for their support of older adults in Washington County. He said that the Advisory Committee and the Division would also like to give a special ‘thank you’ to Commissioner Dick Schouten for his service, advice and valuable counsel over the last eight years on the Advisory Committee. Mr. Hill looked forward to Commissioner Terry’s participation on the Committee in the future.
It was moved to proclaim May 2011 as Older Americans month to salute our older citizens and their connections to community.
Motion – Schouten 2nd – Terry Vote – 5-0
3.b. MO 11-86 Proclamation in Honor of Volunteer Recognition Month
The Clerk of the Board read the proclamation into the record.
Sheriff Rob Gordon spoke of the invaluable service provided by the 1,500 volunteers to Washington County and of how we could not manage without them. He indicated that the Sheriff’s Office has 250 volunteers who are active in every part of the organization. Sheriff Gordon provided some examples:
Ham radio operators Buddy bear program Citizens Academy alumnae Community Chaplains Jail Chaplains Disabled parking enforcement Elder Safe victim advocates Explorers Jail volunteers who help with booking and visiting processes Master’s level jail interns who work in rehabilitative programs People with canines that are specially trained to offer crisis support Posse Reserve deputies Search and Rescue aides Stop Kids from Intoxicated Driving (SKID) presenters
Sheriff Gordon said that these examples exist in every County department. He introduced Susan Welch and Annie Moyle, both of whom volunteer in a program called the VINE (Victim Information and Notification Everyday) program. The Sheriff thanked the Board for having this proclamation and recognizing the work of volunteers.
Annie Moyle said that when she moved to Washington County, she looked for volunteer opportunities in the community. She stated that she has always had an interest in the criminal justice system and became a juvenile court facilitator in Hillsboro. Ms. Moyle found that position rewarding and it showed her that she was on the right volunteer path. She decided to explore other opportunities within the criminal justice system and attended the Washington County Sheriff’s Office Citizens Academy. Ms. Moyle was
introduced to all aspects of the Sheriff’s Office and she then knew that she had to be a part of this exemplary organization. She toured the Jail, where she witnessed the principles of direct supervision employed by the Sheriff’s Office promoting safety and control. Ms. Moyle observed deputies being fair, firm and professional. She said that as a current member of the VINE team, she helps victims of violent crimes to stay safe by registering them with the statewide program and notifying them when their offenders are released or transferred. Ms. Moyle was proud to be part of this important team. She said that Washington County is a great place to live and work. By volunteering here, Ms. Moyle feels that she can be a part of the solution to some of the problems we face. Her volunteerism inspires her to be a better citizen of this community.
Susan Welch provided the history of how and why the VINE program was formed, so that victims could be notified when their offenders get released. She described her duties as part of the VINE team, which makes this program available to people who might want it. Ms. Welch spoke of her opportunity, through phone calls, to encourage victims who are fixing their lives. She knew that she and Ms. Moyle make a difference to a handful of people every week. Ms. Welch said that if you are a victim in the state of Oregon, there is a chance that you will never hear about the VINE program unless you live in Washington County; that is because this county has two volunteers who call the victims.
Audience applause recognized the efforts of these volunteers.
Chair Duyck thanked all of the volunteers in Washington County, who volunteer in so many different capacities.
Commissioner Schouten appreciated hearing from the two volunteers and from the Sheriff today.
It was moved to proclaim April Washington County Volunteer Month for 2011.
Motion – Rogers 2nd – Malinowski Vote – 5-0
4. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 4.a. MO 11-87 Announce Vacancies on Boards and Commissions (All CPOs)
Chair Duyck announced vacancies on the following Board-appointed advisory committees:
Aging and Veteran Services Advisory Council Audit Committee Commission on Children and Families
Farm Board Park and Recreation Advisory Board Metzger park Advisory Board Planning Commission (Vacancies in Districts 3, 4 and At-Large) West Slope Community Library Advisory Board
Chair Duyck encouraged interested persons to contact the County Administrative Office to obtain an application form to apply for these vacancies.
4.b. MO 11-88 Appoint Member to the Washington County Fairgrounds Advisory Committee (All CPOs)
It was moved to appoint Larry Pederson to the Fairgrounds Advisory Committee for a term ending December 31, 2012.
Motion – Schouten 2nd – Terry Vote – 5-0
Despite the fact that this is not a public hearing, the Board elected to accept the following testimony.
Tom Black, 870 NW Garibaldi, Hillsboro, Oregon, said that in September of 2010, the Board appointed eight persons to this group: Nicole Berg, Jonathan Schlueter, David Villalpando and Cindy Phillips for terms ending December 31, 2011 and Tom Brian, Don McCoun, Terry Goldman and Jerry Willey for terms ending December 31, 2012. He cited Minute Order 10-314 dated September 28, 2010 and submitted this for the record. (Minute Order may be found in the Meeting File.)
Mr. Black said that apparently Chair Duyck has an automatic seat along with whoever is President of the Fair Board. He calculated that there are nine members existing as of this date and said that Larry Pederson would be a tenth member. Mr. Black said that the Board might be out of order appointing a tenth member, relative to the MOU and agreement with the Fair Board.
The Chair and Vice Chair determined that there are nine members.
Chair Duyck listed the members: Chair Andy Duyck, Don McCoun (Current Chair of Fair Board), Jerry Willey, David Villalpando, Jonathan Schlueter, Cindy Phillips, Terry Goldman, Nicole Berg, and, now, Larry Pederson. He acknowledged that at the time this committee was formed, it was anticipated that Tom Brian would be on it but that has not occurred. Chair Duyck said that if that is incorrect, we will take steps to correct it.
Commissioner Schouten noted that two members are ex officio, i.e., their membership depends on their status as an official. He said that whoever is President of the Fair Board or member of the Board of Commissioners will serve on this Committee. Commissioner Schouten pointed out that Tom Brian is no longer on the Board of Commissioners. He explained that if Tom Brian was ever on the Committee, he would not be on as ex officio once he left office.
Chair Duyck asked staff to check on this.
Rob Massar assured the Board that staff would get to the bottom of this.
Commissioner Schouten stated that Larry Pederson brings key experience that is really needed on the Committee and added that it is not easy to find. He regarded his business and budgeting background, particularly in the public sector, as unparalleled.
5. PUBLIC HEARING – LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION 5.a. RO 11-26 Consider Continuation of the Transportation Development Tax Temporary Discount
Steve Kelley said that this is a public hearing on the Transportation Development Tax (TDT) discount, which was adopted in October of 2009, in response to the economic recession. He stated that this decision is to either continue the discount or to terminate the reduction in rates. Mr. Kelley clarified that adoption of the Resolution will continue the discount as approved in October of 2009. He recommended that the Board conduct the public hearing as required by Ordinance 729 and adopt the Resolution and Order.
The public hearing was opened.
Alan Taylor, 10246 N. Smith Street, Portland, Oregon, was accompanied by Shauna Carter, 8150 SW Barnes Road, Hillsboro, Oregon. He said that Ms. Carter, another individual and he would like to put in a brewery restaurant in downtown Hillsboro. Mr. Taylor stated that the Transportation Development Tax is one of the biggest costs that will affect this proposed business. He said that changing the land use category has a net TDT of over $87,000—money that will have to be funded through loans. Mr. Taylor stated that in addition, the SDC for sanitary sewer has a net cost of $33,600. He summarized that the current fees, taxes, TDT and SDC for the project will total approximately $146,000. Mr. Taylor said that his understanding is that that amount is based upon the discounted rates. He hoped to bring 14 jobs to the downtown area during the regular part of the year and 20 employees during the summer months. Mr. Taylor was trying to make this project feasible financially and testified that the TDT does make it quite a challenge.
Denzil Scheller, 253 E. Main Street, Hillsboro, Oregon, submitted a handout, which may be found in the Meeting File. He represented the Hillsboro Chamber of Commerce. Mr.
Scheller said that while many economists are convinced that the recession is over, many small businesses in Washington County continue to struggle against a soft economy. He stated that as business begins to pick up and expansion or relocation is contemplated, many small businesses and developers are faced with sticker shock from the new TDT. Mr. Scheller imagined the Board would hear tonight from businesses that wanted to grow, were willing to invest thousands of dollars in tenant improvements, only to be hit with TDT fees that are three to four times that amount. He concluded that the TDT is often a deal breaker. Mr. Scheller appreciated that there was recognition by the Board that the economic climate was just not right for full implementation of the TDT phase-in and the willingness to extend the discount period, allowing for a sensitive economic climate to continue to heal from the beating the business community has taken over the last few years. He believed, however, that the discount program does not provide enough relief for small businesses and developers. Mr. Scheller asked the Board to direct staff to conduct an analysis of the impact on small business throughout the County. He said that the Chamber also suggests that the County look at potentially waiving TDT fees for projects under a specified square footage. Mr. Scheller stated that recovering from the recession will require that small businesses begin to grow, expand and add jobs. He said that recovery in Washington County will become diminished if the cost of expansion becomes too burdensome. Mr. Scheller reported that the Hillsboro Chamber continues to be supportive of the need for transportation infrastructure funding. However, he said that increasing the TDT in a frail economic climate will only serve to exacerbate our slow recovery. Mr. Scheller stated that the initial intentions of the TDT were good but voters simply did not realize the effects of implementation.
Commissioner Malinowski said that even if we applied it fully, the TDT would only cover 28% of the costs that we think development brings in the way of infrastructure. He asked the speaker where else we could get the funds.
Mr. Scheller did not have a suggestion right now.
Commissioner Malinowski asked Mr. Scheller to let him know if he came up with one because that would make his job easier.
Gene Zurbrugg, 380 SE Washington Street, Hillsboro, Oregon, said that he owns a building at 233 SE Washington Street that is a 5,000 square foot professional building. He stated that his previous tenant for the past year was the Republican Party. Mr. Zurbrugg said that he has just rented the building to a chiropractor/physical therapist husband and wife team. He stated that when he went to the city to get his permit for minimal improvements, he was hit with the TDT tax. Mr. Zurbrugg said that the tax credit for his existing use (office use for the Republican Party) was 5,000 times $5,246 per thousand for a TDT tax credit of $26,230. He reported that the city considered the chiropractor/physical therapist a medical use and that is $17,958 per thousand times the 5,000 for a TDT tax of $89,790. Mr. Zurbrugg subtracted the tax credit for the office use from the medical use and his TDT charge was to be $63,560 for a minimal tenant improvement that was going to cost $5,000 to $10,000. He told the city that this was
going to be a deal killer and asked what could be done about it. Mr. Zurbrugg said that with the help of the City of Hillsboro, research was done and he got lucky. He stated that a tenant within the three year time period was Oregon Human Development Corporation, which is a government entity, and so he was allowed to change his previous use from the office to the government and he did not have to pay the TDT and also got his tenant in place. Mr. Zurbrugg said that if the Public Services Building was to be re-built, the TDT tax would be $11,454,000.
Commissioner Malinowski asked if the TDTs are based on the amount of traffic. He wanted to know if staff really feels that this gentleman’s new use of a chiropractor will create more traffic than the Republican Party headquarters. Commissioner Malinowski stated that if we are not actually impacting the amount of traffic, we do not want to discourage brown field redevelopment.
Steve Kelley did not know the specifics of this particular use. In general, he said that the tax replaces the prior Traffic Impact Fee and is based upon the trip generation for an average use of that type. Mr. Kelley explained that in this case, an office becoming a medical clinic would have a considerable increase in daily trips to it for an average use of that kind of category.
Commissioner Malinowski asked if there is any chance for appeal if you do not think that is going to be the case.
Mr. Kelley responded that there is an appeals procedure built into the ordinance. He said that this is very similar to the Traffic Impact Fee, which has been in existence countywide (including inside the cities) since 1990. Mr. Kelley indicated that there has been a lot of history about the way these sorts of fees are calculated. He stated that the issue here is that the Board in 2008 and then the public in the November general election in 2008 voted to increase the fees. Mr. Kelley said that this is really the only substantial difference between this and the tax that has been on the rolls since 1990. He stated that those are all based on the average trip generation of that kind of use. Mr. Kelley said that we only get one shot at a building permit and so do not know what sort of specific use that building permit will continue to be 10, 20, 30, 40 years from now.
Commissioner Malinowski said that when he thinks of a Traffic Impact Fee or a fee of this type, he is thinking that someone somewhere has to lay new asphalt to make this business work. He stated that usually in his district if we are assessing that fee, somebody somewhere needs a road.
Andrew Singelakis said that the Board might want to consider referring it back to the WCCC to take a look at how the tax impacts small businesses.
Commissioner Schouten stated that in terms of what the fees would have been for a building like this, it would not be based on square footage; it would be based on traffic generation. He said that if you look around at all of the parking lots and parking structure around all of these buildings, you can see that there is a substantial impact in terms of traffic generated by all of the employees and people who come here for business. Commissioner Schouten stated that those parking lots represent huge value in terms of land and pointed out that those had to be paid somehow. He said that we have to pay for them one way or the other, whether they are going to be part of a fee like this or some other form. Commissioner Schouten concluded that the fact that we have these huge parking lots around these buildings indicates that there is a societal cost that needs to be addressed. He said that we could not simply not have the parking lots and commented that those things cannot be wished away. Commissioner Schouten stated that this item represents an attempt to try to be realistic about what the traffic has generated and to try to apportion the costs. He observed that the costs have to be carried by someone.
The public hearing was closed.
Vice Chair Rogers recalled that when this was crafted, it was designed to be a fee for additional traffic counts. He did not think it was apparent to some that there are no traffic studies in these. Vice Chair Rogers shared that he added some square footage to his own business and took out parking spots because he was not adding employees but rather space. He divulged that he paid a very large TDT. Vice Chair Rogers reiterated that he did not have any more traffic or employees but just had more space. He said that it is based on square footage. He acknowledged that there are some anomalies. Vice Chair Rogers stated that the difficulty for the WCCC as well as staff is to understand how, over periods of time, usage has changed. He said that we are stuck with the rules as they are unless we are going to go through on each business change and reassess based upon traffic counts, which would mean a traffic study and reassessment. Vice Chair Rogers remarked that it is an imperfect system and he could identify with that. He stated that the fix is not so easy. Vice Chair Rogers thought that Andrew Singelakis’ comment to send it back to the WCCC for additional refinement is a good step. He cautioned that an easy solution is not going to be simple to find unless we are willing to micro-manage who goes into those businesses and what kind of usages they have—not just initially but over time.
Commissioner Terry said that because of the process and the way this whole thing has to be handled, he supports the action this evening. He stated that if we do not do that, then it will automatically go to the maximum tax rather than staying where it is or going to where we are suggesting that it go. Commissioner Terry supported remanding this back to WCCC. He noted that Vice Chair Rogers is the Board’s representative on that body.
Chair Duyck concurred with remanding this back to WCCC. He said that the issue before the Board today is adoption of the Resolution and Order, which does give a discount of the current rate that would be charged.
It was moved to:
Conduct a public hearing on the discount as required by Ordinance 729 and to adopt the Resolution and Order. Authorize the Chairman to sign the Resolution and Order continuing the discount. Direct staff to coordinate the discount as necessary with the cities.
Motion – Terry 2nd – Rogers Vote – 5-0
Commissioner Schouten said that it is always good to take a look at this and have further discussion. He noted that we do have to pay for these things. Commissioner Schouten said that general funds go toward the kind of road projects that help provide the kind of capacity for business that are paid by everyone, business or not. He recognized that this is tough but felt that we have no choice but to put some piece of this into that kind of allocated cost sharing.
Chair Duyck felt that staff has adequate direction to go back to WCCC to have this discussion.
Andrew Singelakis agreed and clarified that his point was to see whether or not the tax disproportionately affects small businesses
5.b. ADOPTED Proposed A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 740 – an Ordinance Amending Policy 29 of the Rural/Natural Resource Plan to Modify the Rural and Urban Reserves Map (All Rural CPOs and CPOs 9, 12F, 12C, 4B, 5 and 6)
There was a motion to read A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 740 by title only.
Motion – Rogers 2nd – Schouten Vote – 5-0
Dan Olsen read the proposed ordinance by title.
Brent Curtis reviewed that Washington County joined Metro, Clackamas County and Multnomah County in pursuing the urban and rural reserves planning process. He recalled that last year, the Board adopted—along with the other participants—urban and rural reserve proposals that were evaluated by LCDC. Mr. Curtis said that in the fall, LCDC approved the proposal for Multnomah County, approved the proposal for Clackamas County and the vast majority of the proposal for Washington County. He
indicated that LCDC did, however, on an oral remand send back several areas to the County for Metro and the County to consider. Mr. Curtis stated that the Board—in the middle of December, 2010—adopted an initial Resolution and Order, which would provide for the first of the two parts of responding to the oral remand, i.e., a proposed IGA with Metro. He said that at the same time, the Board directed County staff to prepare and initiate an ordinance that was congruent with the December 15th Board action of last year and that put Ordinance 740 in motion. Mr. Curtis stated that subsequently, Metro and the Board began to discuss how to respond to developing an IGA. He said that the IGA that was developed last year did not find favor with the Metro Council and a new process occurred. Mr. Curtis stated that that led to an important, lengthy hearing on March 15, 2011, at which Metro and Washington County took considerable testimony, deliberated and formulated a new IGA. He said that the new IGA was the first of the two steps that are needed to respond to the oral remand and follow the requirements of the law. Mr. Curtis stated that the second step is for Metro and Washington County to take the substance within that IGA and conform their land use plans to those particular substantive requirements. He said that that required the Board to engross the originally filed ordinance 740 with the changes agreed to by the Board and Metro in the middle of March. Mr. Curtis explained that according to the County’s Charter, we are required, when an ordinance has been engrossed, to have two public hearings—one of which is in the evening. He recalled that last week, the Board held the first public hearing on the engrossed ordinance; tonight is the second public hearing on the engrossed ordinance. Mr. Curtis recommended adoption of the ordinance tonight. He reported that Metro completed its responsibilities last week by adopting changes to their land use plans. Mr. Curtis said that this will allow Metro and Washington County to finish up their responsibilities. He understood that Clackamas County has adopted the regional findings and believed that Multnomah County will finish their responsibility this Thursday. Mr. Curtis said that if the Board does adopt the ordinance, that will allow staff to submit this to LCDC. He expected that LCDC will review this in the manner of periodic review at their August 17 and 18 meeting.
The public hearing was opened.
Steve Bobosky, 21393 NW West Union Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, submitted a copy of a PowerPoint presentation, which may be found in the Meeting File. He said that it is hard to imagine that when LCDC remanded Cornelius, they intended even better class soils in Helvetia to replace them. Mr. Bobosky stated that there are better close places to go. He used Bendemeer as an example and said that it is one that LCDC specifically mentioned bringing into the urban reserve. One of Mr. Bobosky’s slides showed that Helvetia has the highest class soils in the area at little slope. He said he was frustrated at the March 15th meeting because he could not see the sense in bringing in Helvetia and not Bendemeer. Mr. Bobosky recalled that he asked how this made sense and a Metro Councilor said that there is a prospering CSA north of Bendemeer. He said that he looked into this and found that it is a two acre CSA on lower quality farmland than what
is in Helvetia and it is downhill from a contamination site. Mr. Bobosky could not imagine how that could be a reason not to bring in Bendemeer when it is not even in Bendemeer and instead to bring in high quality farmland in Helvetia.
Commissioner Malinowski commented that he lives in the area and has been watching this interesting orphan site for awhile. He agreed with Mr. Bobosky that picking that out as resource land was a bit of a reach and he was surprised to see it not be urban reserve or at least undesignated. Commissioner Malinowski said that if it ever came back, he would get rid of the marginal soils on Mr. Bobosky’s slide. He stated that they are not marginal, they are Class II out of Class VIII. Commissioner Malinowski said that the PCB site is in the middle of the farmland and is away from this area. He stated that if you took the 130 acre Bendemeer and cut off the part on the other side of Cornelius Pass as well as the Church and Cemetery, it is reasonable that this would have some option. Commissioner Malinowski suggested that Mr. Bobosky keep it just to the exception land area and to lose the portions that are drifting across roads and make it a package deal.
Mr. Bobosky replied that he has been advocating for Bendemeer and that the only reason that he has talked about north of Bendemeer is because some people have said that a reason not to bring in Bendemeer is to be a buffer of other farmland near it.
Commissioner Malinowski said that what Mr. Bobosky really needs is to get a land manager to put together a concept plan and submit it for him because that seems to be the way things work.
Vice Chair Rogers said that Mr. Bobosky’s proposal made sense to him. As he has stated before, that proposal does not have a majority vote. Vice Chair Rogers commented that that does not make it right or wrong; that is just the way it is. He noted that Commissioner Malinowski made some good observations and knows the area better. Vice Chair Rogers stated that if we could start over and were all kings for a day, the map would look different but it is what it is after two-and-a-half years.
Linda Peters, 25440 NW Dairy Creek Road, North Plains, Oregon, submitted written testimony, which may be found in the Meeting File. She wished to associate her testimony with submissions from Save Helvetia, 1,000 Friends and the Farm Bureau. Ms. Peters raised concerns about grave procedural errors made by Metro, Washington County and even the State’s Department of Land Use and Conservation. She stated that Goal 1 requires citizen involvement in all stages of land use decision-making. Ms. Peters said that we have not been able to come to a place where we get a definitive judicial ruling on whether this reserves process has been land use or not land use. She stated that Washington County—uniquely among all of the parties—used only its cities, a couple of Commissioners and one vote for Farm Bureau interests on the Steering Committee, which presented the proposal. Ms. Peters added that the proposal was not heard by the Board first. She said that many hearings have been held since that whole first year. Ms. Peters stated that what we have not seen is a change in the County’s institutional leaning in the direction of some kind of manifest destiny for cities outward into farmland as the
only solution for economic development, which in the judgment of many other people is not the only solution. She said that there has not been as much consideration for the statutorily equivalent requirement of protecting foundation and important farmland. Ms. Peters stated that Metro, although they voiced their preference for preserving farmland and encouraging compact livable urban forms and voted 7-0 on March 15th for a proposal which would have done so, when pressed by Washington County to accept demands for replacement of urban reserves, they yielded—hence, the compromises before us tonight. She said that the outcome of this process is not just how well the process is regarded in the mind of the public; the outcome of the process is what kind of future we have in Washington County. Ms. Peters implored the Board to very carefully re-think the path that it is about to set us on because it is a path that is going to be very tough and we are not at the end of it.
Walter Williams, 22740 SW Rosedale Road, Beaverton, Oregon, was accompanied by Abbie Assefa, 22740 SW Rosedale Road, Beaverton, Oregon. He said that he and his neighbors were just recently made aware of Area E inclusion as Metro and Washington County expand the Urban Growth Boundary. Mr. Williams noted that he was excluded and wants to be included. He said that he petitioned to be included on March 6 and 7, 2011, prior to the March 15th meeting. Mr. Williams stated that eight days passed before he got communication from the Board or Metro offices. He said he got no true reason why he was excluded and that it makes sense to be included. Mr. Williams stated that on March 7th, a property owner in the area, Ms. Franks, talked to Andy Shaw at Metro and discussed potential changes of the boundary. He specified that they discussed a technical modification that could potentially happen without having to vote or going to any meeting. Mr. Williams said that this made sense and was very easy to do but stated that it was disapproved because the Board and Metro moved forward. He had the impression that this was done in a vacuum and that not much information was given to the public. Mr. Williams said that this non-disclosure and back door type of activity are questionable. He stated that citizen participation and involvement were not there. Mr. Williams said that this affects his livelihood and potential future. He stated that the land that he has was brought in at the very end and poses a financial burden because of the use of the land and what is allowed. Mr. Williams asked for reconsideration and an opportunity to be included in this project.
Chair Duyck clarified that this is not an expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary, as stated by Mr. Williams, but rather urban reserves—which could potentially be areas where the Urban Growth Boundary might be expanded into. Relative to Mr. Williams’ reference to a technical adjustment discussed with Andy Shaw at Metro, Chair Duyck said that he subsequently called Mr. Shaw to find out if he knew something that the Board was not aware of and learned that there is no technical adjustment. He said that if there were any adjustments to the reserves at this point, or any point along the ordinance process, we would have to go back by several months and have a new Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro that would re-adjust those boundaries. Chair Duyck stated that that is the only process that we are aware of. He said he would be very interested in knowing something other than that.
Mr. Williams asked if he could re-submit if he finds his information to be accurate.
Chair Duyck replied that he could certainly come back to the Board because if there is a technical adjustment method, then it would be separate from this process.
Vice Chair Rogers could understand that it is frustrating to appear to come in at the end. For the benefit of the viewing audience, he clarified that this process has been going on for two-and-one-half years and well over 100 meetings around the region with lots of discussion. Vice Chair Rogers said that it is unprecedented, not only in the area that we are in but in the whole United States, to have a group of counties and a region come together to try to establish boundaries. He noted that it is very difficult; we all have to be in agreement. Vice Chair Rogers related that there hasn’t been agreement on many occasions. He said that this pulsating effect has been frustrating not only to Mr. Williams but also to the Board. Vice Chair Rogers observed that other people have testified, for good reason, that they do not want in and others who, for good reason, want in. He said that this is a democracy and we vote on issues. Vice Chair Rogers stated that unfortunately, even though Mr. Williams may have become aware just recently, this was pretty much cast even by March because it had been down to LCDC and through a number of hearings as to what the boundary is going to look like; only minor adjustments were made. He said that it does not make it right, it does not satisfy Mr. Williams and he empathized by saying that he would want to be in too if he was in Mr. Williams’ position. Vice Chair Rogers explained that we are not quite certain how to do that at this point without opening it up and he personally was not willing to do that because we fought for two-and-one-half years to come to where we are at. He stated that if there are some technical revisions we can do, he would love to get Mr. Williams in without opening it back up and having the whole region fight again. Vice Chair Rogers said that if he sounds a little weary, it is because of the number of meetings, the amount of materials the Board has had to review, and the number of skirmishes and battles. He stated that he would rather be in Cornelius and in Mr. Williams’ area but he only gets one vote.
Mr. Williams said that there is a question of transparency and communication with the public as to what is exactly going on. He asked how to find this information a little more ahead of time so that he can be more proactive and help come up with good solutions that benefit all citizens.
Vice Chair Rogers asked staff to comment on how many notices were sent out, etc.
Brent Curtis did not have that detail at the moment. He reviewed that last year, we adopted the findings and there was a very extensive section that talked about and documented all of the public involvement. Mr. Curtis said that we have had a website from the very beginning and we posted the findings last week when they became available, just after staff provided them to the Board. He stated that we worked with Metro and the other two counties, who also had very extensive public involvement processes and ways to notify their own separate publics. Mr. Curtis offered to provide Mr. Williams with the website address and point him to the findings that document just
exactly how many meetings we had, how many people we engaged and what kinds of information were developed to the public. He said that Mr. Williams might even be able to find, if they recorded it all, the nine hour public hearing on March 15, 2011, in which Metro and Washington County actually debated all these issues and came to difficult conclusions about the lands to be included or not included in the categories under consideration. Mr. Curtis was happy to give Mr. Williams additional information after the meeting.
Chair Duyck commented that, in addition to that, there have been innumerable newspaper stories that have even included maps over the last two to three years. He was aware that, in our busy lives, we still do not get the message sometimes.
Mr. Williams stated that this portion where he is excluded was not a part of that.
Commissioner Terry said that if Mr. Williams finds a technical way, he assured him that the Board and the City of Cornelius would be very interested in that. He encouraged Mr. Williams to bring that back to the Board so that they could work with him for that conclusion.
Dick Reynolds, Planning Manager, City of Cornelius, 42740 NW Gould Lane, Banks, Oregon, submitted written testimony, which may be found in the Meeting File. He presented the Farmland Compromise and referenced two maps that were placed on an easel. Mr. Reynolds said that the Farmland Compromise is the proposal to trade the 352 acres north of Highway 26 that are currently called out to be urban reserves for 352 acres north of Cornelius to be called out as urban reserves. He stated that the area north of Cornelius is not a protrusion into farmland, that it does abut the wide Dairy Creek floodplain as proposed and that the soils are not the best of the best in Washington County. Mr. Reynolds referenced one of Mr. Bobosky’s slides of the soils north of Highway 26 identifying the Class I soils. He said that when that is compared to the area north of Cornelius, there are no Class I soils identified. Mr. Reynolds referred to page 35 of staff’s proposed findings, with a subtitle of ‘Supplemental Findings for New Rural Reserve Land Near Cornelius (Northern Portion of Former Area 7I)’. He said that the findings are to support rural reserves but actually do make statements that are more in support for the area being urban reserves. Mr. Reynolds quoted from the staff report, “The new area is suitable for urban development, given the generally flat topography and proximity of urban services from Cornelius.” He said that that same section goes on to state, “The County’s analysis for the area rated it as a Tier II candidate for reserve area. Tier II was due to dwelling density found throughout the entire subarea.” Mr. Reynolds ran out of time but had wanted to make a point about Measure 37 claims and some of the specifics about the remand coming back and how it was sent back.
Joe Rayhawk, 15248 NW Germantown Road, Portland, Oregon, complimented Brent Curtis on his answer regarding where growth is liable to occur in the next 20 to 50 years about two meetings ago. He said that it was one of the most brilliant answers he has ever heard. Tom Black, 870 NW Garibaldi Street, Hillsboro, Oregon, wished to establish precedent relative to LCDC because he thinks a higher court than the Board will respond to this. His concern was with Area 8A—2,700 acres that are north of Evergreen, south of Highway 26 and bordered by areas between Jackson School and Glencoe on the west and Shute Road on the east. Mr. Black stated that it is significant because it is foundation farmland. He also objected to Area 8B, which is also foundation farmland, and the undesignated land that is north of Highway 26 that were the additional areas that were the swap/trade between the other parcel north of Cornelius. Mr. Black said that there are other alternatives: they can be the areas that are conflicted designated areas or some of the undesignated areas—most being in the south end of the County. He summarized that we have prime farmland, most Soil Types I or II, that we are now going to put in the target site of development. Mr. Black felt that that was the worst thing to do because future generations will have to eat from land somewhere. He said that it seems that we are constantly going forward with different assorted maps. Mr. Black wanted to have more collaboration when we start these ventures and to bring more people to the table.
Cherry Amabisca, 13260 NW Bishop Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, did not speak tonight but submitted two folders of written and electronic testimony regarding Ordinance 740 into the record. Submissions included the following:
Washington County Farm Bureau: Memo and photos: Ag infrastructure costs, field tiling, dated April 25, 2011 Memo and photos: Opposition to Area E as proposed “undesignated” dated April 25, 2011 Letter and maps: Farm Bureau Recommendations, resubmission with enhanced map, dated April 19, 2011 Letter with attachments: Urban/Agriculture Conflicts, Lack of Good Edges dated April 21, 2011 Save Helvetia: CD: WaCo Reserves Record for Ord. No. 733 dated June, 2010 CD: Ordinance No. 740 Testimony from Save Helvetia and Washington County Farm Bureau with hard copy of Index of contents Hard copies of the following: Memo and photos: Area 8B dated April 25, 2011 Letter to DLCD dated April 25, 2011 Memo and photos: Area 8D as Urban Reserves jeopardizes farming dated April 25, 2011 Memo and photos: Area 8D dated April 25, 2011 Memo and photos: Area 8B Historical House dated April 25, 2011 Memo and article: CPO 8 registers opposition to urban reserves dated March 15, 2011 Memo and photos: Area 8B Atfalati Cultural Site dated April 25, 2011 Memo and handout: Area 8D Board Guidance dated April 25, 2011 Memo and soil survey: Bendemeer neighborhood dated April 25, 2011 Memo and advertisements: Land speculation prices dated April 25, 2011
The public hearing was closed.
Vice Chair Rogers was not sure what is left to be said. He stated that we have repeatedly said that if we could stay out of Helvetia, that would be great and we would love to be able to go to somewhere around Cornelius and if there were some other inclusionary areas, we would do that as well. However, Vice Chair Rogers noted that it is what it is tonight.
It was moved to adopt A-Engrossed Ordinance 740.
Motion – Rogers 2nd – Terry Vote – 3-2 (Nay: Schouten, Malinowski)
Chair Duyck recognized that this has been a tough decision. He said that one of the most frustrating things for him has been that we are statutorily bound to hold public hearings after the decision has been made. Chair Duyck noted that that does not allow the Board flexibility to make changes at this point. He said that during this ordinance process, the Board could not make changes unless it wanted to go back to a prior process, which was held back in March (the Intergovernmental Agreement between Washington County and Metro). Chair Duyck stated that at some point, we had to realize that we have about as good an agreement as we are going to get. He was not convinced that holding any other type of process would have gotten us any other type of solution. Chair Duyck felt that it is best to move it beyond this Board and let it work its way through the process, through LCDC and through any appeals that may pop up, and let it live or die on its own.
Commissioner Malinowski appreciated the hard work that went into this. He was glad to see it going forward so that the courts can deal with it. Commissioner Malinowski said that he is glad that he can vote the way he thinks.
6. LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION 6.a. RO 11-29 Adopt Findings for A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 740 (All Rural CPOs and CPOs 9, 12F, 12C, 4B, 5 and 6)
It was moved to adopt the proposed findings for A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 740 and to authorize the Chair to sign the Resolution and Order memorializing the action.
Motion – Rogers 2nd – Terry Vote – 5-0
Commissioner Schouten complimented Brent Curtis, his staff, and staff across the entire region on the phenomenal staff work. He said that while he has his reasons for voting “nay” on the ordinance itself—principally because of the designation of urban reserve for the area north of Sunset Highway in the Helvetia area—he does think that the findings are well done and are consistent with the ordinance. Commissioner Schouten took this vote to mean, “Are the findings supportive and consistent with the ordinance?” and he found that they are.
7. ORAL COMMUNICATION (5 MINUTE OPPORTUNITY)
Joe Rayhawk, 15248 NW Germantown Road, Portland, Oregon, submitted written testimony, which may be found in the Meeting File. He said that the Case-Shiller report came out this morning and we are within one-tenth of a percent of a double dip in housing nationally. Mr. Rayhawk stated that Portland is down another 1.3% from January to February and 7% year-over-year; Portland is 28% off the peak of July 2007. He said that from Nightly Business Report, 38% of home loans in 2007 and early 2008 were interest-only ARMs. Mr. Rayhawk indicated that these are, or will be, the source of what is now called the “closet inventory”: people who can in theory pay their mortgages after the ARM expires, at least in the short term, but may be doomed within years and may be stopping payments at any moment. He said that related to that, an estimated 8-9 million mortgages nationwide are seriously delinquent.
Mr. Rayhawk said that recent news is that there is an upsurge in adding small secondary homes to existing property—typically less than 800 square feet. He stated that three uses are:
Traditional: Grandparents moving back in for a few years of semi-independent living Described before: Kids moving back in with parents and perhaps helping to make mortgage payments. New: Owners move into the smaller house and rent the larger house. The huge advantage is to try to keep the house until the prices come back. The big house, plus rental, may get much of the new improvement back.
Mr. Rayhawk’s submittal lists a series of reasons why there are potential advantages to the county and said that Clackamas has apparently been discussing this in the last day or two.
Mr. Rayhawk updated some of his previous estimates. He had previously estimated that each new commuter from north of the freeway would add 394 hours to the commute of Commissioner Terry’s constituents. Mr. Rayhawk stated that this was based on rush hour speeds through the tunnel of 15 mph. He said that a recent Oregonian article suggests that the speed at the peak of rush hour is only 4 mph. Mr. Rayhawk stated that using an average of the two numbers suggests that 1,000 hours are wasted per new commuter. He said that since Arbor Oaks and infill have already added more than 100 new commuters,
Commissioner Terry’s constituents are wasting 100,000 hours per year in their commutes. Mr. Rayhawk reasoned that a similar total applies to Commissioner Schouten’s and Vice Chair Rogers’ constituents for a total in the general range of 200,000 hours per year.
Mr. Rayhawk said that the Board recently increased the amount committed for improving Bethany Boulevard from $14.6 million to $25 million, including widening the Bethany Bridge. He stated that this will extend the time when more than twice as much is being spent than should be pro-rated by the population from five to six years. Mr. Rayhawk said that LUT has begun doing traffic counts on Bethany Boulevard north of West Union. He stated that using analysis done for south of West Union, it is clear that this north section should be widened at least to Laidlaw. Mr. Rayhawk said that this will need another $10 to $20 million. He stated that the two will bring the amount of over- committed to two years of MSTIP funds. Mr. Rayhawk said that this will delay congestion and safety projects for the other 88% of the population by two years. He reported that for the last two days, he has monitored the on-ramps at Sunset and Murray during late morning rush hour. Mr. Rayhawk explained that he has missed the peak time because he has morning hay duty at the stables. He reported on his observations:
The ramp lights at Cornell were only allowing one car every 5 seconds This works out to a maximum of 720 cars per hour The ramps at Murray were only allowing one car every 7 seconds This yields a capacity of 514 cars per hour Based on many previous observations, both ramps have cars queued from 6:30 until after 8:00; both ramps are at full capacity during the entire rush hour.
Mr. Rayhawk said that widening the bridge will do very little good; all it does is move the spot where the queuing occurs. His numbers show an estimated increased commute for this year of 2,025 hours for the current residents north of the freeway. Mr. Rayhawk said that one might be tempted to project after 25 years, multiplying by 25, to get 50,000 hours per year.
Mr. Rayhawk said that any citizen can come here and testify. He stated that it is very hard for Commissioners to challenge one or two points without tacitly accepting the others, especially with someone like himself who is trying to communicate with the Commissioners. Mr. Rayhawk said that he does not say enough out loud for the audience to understand or know for sure what he is talking about. He hopes that he at least intrigues them enough so that they go look this up. Mr. Rayhawk stated that anyone can say anything and just because the Commissioners do not object to something does not mean that they accept it. He recalled that a few months ago, Chair Duyck challenged something that he said. Mr. Rayhawk shared that his initial reaction was to argue but he realized that that was wrong. He said that this is the kind of thing that happens in Washington, D.C. between President Obama, the Democrats and Republicans. Mr. Rayhawk stated that one proposes something and the other attacks—even when it is
something they proposed two years ago. He said that we are seeing the same kind of ridiculous behavior in the Legislature where they are killing good bills because they are in a fit of pique. Mr. Rayhawk concluded that we need to be communicating and we need to be cooperating.
Tom Black, 870 NW Garibaldi Street, Hillsboro, Oregon, brought up a recent CPO meeting, where he witnessed a Fairgrounds presentation where Betty Pomeroy (who represents the Veterans Association) was in attendance. He said that the concept is to use pavers on the area just north of the Tri-Met station at Veterans Plaza. Mr. Black stated that he is not against those who were in the service but prefers that this walkway include all volunteers. He wanted the pavers to include pillars in the community as well as those who gave their all from their station in life as volunteers who have made the Fairgrounds what it is as a gathering place. Mr. Black envisioned a grand entryway, reflecting on past and current volunteers with the pavers or whatever is used to beautify the entry to the new Fairgrounds of the future.
Chair Duyck asked if Mr. Black is saying that volunteers are excluded. The Chair’s understanding is that the pavers are a fundraiser and anyone can participate and purchase a paved brick with their name on it.
Mr. Black replied that the pavers are meant for veterans only—not for anyone in the community who would be a volunteer.
Rob Massar assured the Board he would track down the answer to this.
Mr. Black said he also wants to expand the concept so that it is not just at the Tri-Met station but also the walkway that approaches from the southeast heading northward. He wanted the pavers to recognize significant volunteers.
Commissioner Terry was under the impression that this is open to everybody.
Chair Duyck agreed and commented that if it is not open to everybody, the fundraising effort would be a failure. He said that we want anyone to participate who is willing to do so.
Linda Peters, 25440 NW Dairy Creek Road, North Plains, Oregon, knew that this was not planned but noted that the Board managed to honor her twice tonight: 1) the proclamation for Older Americans Month and 2) the proclamation honoring volunteers. Having just passed her 72nd birthday, she felt that she qualifies for the first proclamation and she has volunteered a huge amount of time to the urban and rural reserves process. Ms. Peters said that she is continuing her volunteering by working with CPO 8 leadership.
With good natured teasing about the Older Americans Month, Commissioner Terry identified himself as the senior member on the Board at the present time.
8. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
9. ADJOURNMENT: 8:07 p.m.
Motion – Terry 2nd – Rogers Vote – 5-0
MINUTES APPROVED THIS ____ DAY ______2011
______RECORDING SECRETARY CHAIRMAN
MINUTES
WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MAY 3, 2011
CONVENED: 10:01 a.m.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Chair Andy Duyck Vice Chair Roy Rogers Commissioner Dick Schouten Commissioner Greg Malinowski Commissioner Bob Terry
STAFF: Robert Davis, County Administrator Rod Rice, Deputy County Administrator Sia Lindstrom, Sr. Deputy County Administrator Dan Olsen, County Counsel Brad Anderson, Sr. Assistant County Counsel Andrew Singelakis, Director, LUT Victoria Saager, Management Analyst II, LUT Rich Hobernicht, Director, A&T Sheriff Rob Gordon Bill Gaffi, General Manager, CWS Margot Barnett, CPO Coordinator Jim Thiessen, Audiovisual Technician Barbara Hejtmanek
PRESS: Dana Tims, The Oregonian
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 15, 2011 April 19, 2011
1. CONSENT AGENDA
Chair Duyck announced the following modifications to the Consent Agenda:
There is award of bid on item 1.b. to Knife River Corporation – Northwest in the amount of $2,263,066.11. Item 1.k. is removed from today’s agenda, at the request of staff.
It was moved to adopt the Consent Agenda, as modified.
Motion – Rogers 2nd – Schouten Vote – 5-0
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
1.a. MO 11-99 Approve Agreement with the Oregon Department of Transportation for Providing 2003 Oregon Transportation Investment Act Funds for the Boones Ferry Road (Norwood Road to Day Road) Project and Jurisdictional Transfer Agreement (CPO 5) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.b. MO 11-100 Approve Bid Award, Execute Contract and Authorize Construction of the 2011 Washington County Road Fund Maintenance Overlay and Road Improvement Project (All CPOs) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.c. MO 11-101 Accept Bid and Award Contract for Hydroseeding Services (All CPOs) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1.d. MO 11-102 Approve the 2011 Action Plan for Submission to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
HOUSING SERVICES
1.e. MO 11-103 Approve FY 2010 Supportive Housing Program Grant Agreement – Housing Stabilization Program (CPO 4K) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.f. MO 11-104 Approve Supportive Housing Program Grant Agreement – HopeSpring Transitional Housing (All CPOs) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.g. MO 11-105 Approve FY 2010 Supportive Housing Program Grant Agreement – Youth Transitional Living Program (All CPOs) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.h. MO 11-106 Approve FY 2010 Shelter Plus Care Program Renewal Grant Agreement (All CPOs) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.i. MO 11-107 Approve FY 2010 Supportive Housing Program Grant Agreement – Washington County Transitional Housing Program (CPO 6) (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
SUPPORT SERVICES
1.j. MO 11-108 Accept Bid/Award Contract for Reroof the South Side of Charles D. Cameron Public Services Building – ARRA Project (Approved Under Consent Agenda)
1.k. MO 11-109 Accept Bid/Award Contract for Providing and Installing Carpet (Removed From Agenda)
2. ORAL COMMUNICATION (2 MINUTE OPPORTUNITY)
None.
3. PRESENTATION 3.a. MO 11-94 Recognition of Sheriff’s Office for Achieving Reaccreditation for the Second Time by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (CALEA)
Sheriff Rob Gordon wished to talk about an accreditation that the Sheriff’s Office received recently. He said that the Sheriff’s Office sought accreditation on the law enforcement side—the services outside of the secure jail—beginning in 2002. Sheriff Gordon stated that it was an extensive effort because they were measuring their performance against national standards. He reported that in the Sheriff’s Office’s case, there are 412 of those national standards that apply. Sheriff Gordon said that the Sheriff’s Office opened its doors and invited people to measure them. He stated that the Sheriff’s Office received its first accreditation in 2004. Sheriff Gordon summarized that it has become a cultural part of the Sheriff’s Office and has been continuing for ten years.
He told the Board that this is the Sheriff’s Office’s third award. Sheriff Gordon related that his is the only Sheriff’s Office in Oregon to reach this accreditation standard and that this is the largest law enforcement office of any kind in Oregon to be a nationally accredited agency. He saw this award as a celebration of infrastructure, part of which is the financial support by the Board and the community. Sheriff Gordon said that this has allowed bringing training, equipment and professionalism to an elite standard. He reported that this was by far the best outcome in the accreditation process. Sheriff Gordon said that three national inspectors spent about one week here and went through everything, including vehicles, forensic unit, property storage unit, spoke to deputies, did ride-alongs, went into court holding areas and measured the Sheriff’s Office against the national standards. He stated that the inspectors were highly complimentary, especially relative to the high number of awards the Sheriff’s Office has received. Sheriff Gordon specified that Sheriff deputies have received over 100 awards during that time for commendations, life saving awards, humanitarian awards, medals of valor, and the like. He summarized that, on average, the Sheriff’s Office received 200 citizen compliments every year during this period. Sheriff Gordon compared that to 191 complaints, some of which are citizen generated and some are generated by the Sheriff’s Office’s own supervisors. He reported that during that time, there were only 19 sustained allegations. Sheriff Gordon put that into perspective by saying that the Sheriff’s Office responded to over 390,000 calls for service during that three-year period. He said that this accreditation process has now become the culture for his office: professionalism and concentration on the core values used to teach, preach and hire through. Sheriff Gordon stated that the assessors were complimentary of the program to train deputies to elite status, especially those on special units such as narcotics, homicide, and tactical officers. He went on to say that they were also complimentary of the Sheriff’s Office status in leading the State of Oregon in DUI enforcement; the Sheriff’s Office has been DUI Sheriff’s Office Agency of the Year six out of the last eight years. Sheriff Gordon reported that this year, there have been about 1,200 DUI arrests. He said that the evaluators looked at the search and rescue program, which is almost entirely a volunteer- driven program, and said it was very highly regarded in the inspection report. Sheriff Gordon stated that the unit that probably stands out the most is the forensics and property inventory unit. He indicated that they have about 100,000 pieces of property, ranging from stolen property to evidence seized from homicides. Sheriff Gordon said that the use of force analysis was the best the inspectors have ever seen in any agency in the country. He stated that the transparency of the agency was highly complimented.
Sheriff Gordon said that in the eighth year of law enforcement accreditation, this is a cultural mainstay of what the Sheriff’s Office in Washington County is about. He stated that it is also a time to thank partners including the Board, the County Administrative Office, County Counsel, and all of the support units of Washington County. Sheriff Gordon particularly thanked Marcy Allie, her assistant Briani Solberg-Bell and Chief Deputy Pat Garrett.
Chief Deputy Garrett thanked the men and women in the Sheriff’s Office, whose hard work and professionalism enable the office to continue to be accredited. He said that
there are additional standards mandated on the agency every time you re-accredit. Chief Deputy Garrett explained that CALEA does not just let you rest on the laurels of maintaining the current system in place. He thanked the Board for taking the time to help memorialize the reaccreditation.
Commissioner Schouten congratulated the Sheriff’s Office. He appreciated having tangible proof from an outside, disinterested source of the merit of the Sheriff’s Office.
Commissioner Terry asked about what suggestions were made for areas of improvement.
Sheriff Gordon responded that their strongest recommendation was to identify one or two command officers to become national accreditors.
Briani Solberg-Bell did not recall anything in particular.
Sheriff Gordon recalled a few minor things. He said, for example, that when the inspectors rode with the deputies, they heard that the deputies would like to have 10-hour shifts back. Sheriff Gordon told the Board that it is not possible to do that and staff all of the districts. He stated that the inspectors suggested a minor policy change on the biased- based policing. Sheriff Gordon summarized that the review was surprisingly uneventful in the negative sense.
Commissioner Terry said that he has run into our officers across the state and noted that they are always very well received and represent us very well. He was aware that our Sheriff’s Office is recognized for its leadership in the state. Commissioner Terry observed that our Sheriff’s Office performs a lot of training throughout the state. He said that this shows that Washington County is a leadership county. Commissioner Terry appreciated the part that Sheriff Gordon and the Sheriff’s Office play in that.
Commissioner Malinowski thanked the Sheriff. He said that the Association of Oregon Counties has its training session on public safety in Washington County. Commissioner Malinowski stated that part of that is because our Sheriff’s Office is a model for what needs to be done. He said that he sees citizens at CPO meetings who appreciate briefings from representatives of the Sheriff’s Office.
Chair Duyck invited his fellow Commissioners to take action on this item by giving the Sheriff and his office a round of applause for achieving this benchmark.
The Board applauded in recognition of the reaccreditation.
4. PROCLAMATIONS 4.a. MO 11-95 Proclaim Mental Health Month in Washington County
The Clerk of the Board read the proclamation into the record.
Nona Clarke, Director, Washington County Consumer Council (Comfort Zone), 548 SE 6th Avenue, Hillsboro, Oregon, presented the Board with iris flowers in recognition of Mental Health Month. She said that Comfort Zone is a drop-in center for people living with mental illness who are in Washington County. Ms. Clarke stated that Comfort Zone is also a peer to peer organization, which means that it is completely consumer driven. She clarified that consumers are people living with mental illness. Ms. Clarke expressed appreciation for Board support and thanked the Board for recognizing the proclamation.
Chair Duyck recalled that the iris has a symbolic meaning for the mentally ill.
Ms. Clarke agreed and identified the iris as the mental health flower. She added that it is used in recognition of Mental Health Month and mental illnesses in general.
Vice Chair Rogers said that every year, the Board looks forward to receiving the iris flowers and recognizing this particular month. He stated that it is a population that we try to serve the best we can. Vice Chair Rogers understood that it is important work and that it affects the fiber of our community. He thanked Ms. Clarke for all that she does in this regard.
Joe Riceman (name may be misspelled; did not sign in) identified himself as Program Director for Lifeworks NW who works in adult outpatient services in Washington County. He was accompanied by Betty Cratchie (name is misspelled; did not sign in), the Director of Development for Lifeworks NW. Mr. Riceman thanked the Board for the formal acknowledgment of the 50th anniversary of Lifeworks NW in the proclamation. He said that Lifeworks NW started with about 6 or 8 people; there are over 500 employees now. Mr. Riceman appreciated the support and the relationship with Washington County.
Commissioner Terry expressed support for the work that Lifeworks NW performs.
Nona Clarke stated that Comfort Zone would like the Board, Washington County and Lifeworks NW to consider them a partner.
It was moved to proclaim May 2011 as “Mental Health Awareness Month” in Washington County.
Motion – Schouten 2nd – Terry Vote – 5-0
4.b. MO 11-96 Proclaim National Public Works Week May 15 through May 21, 2011 (All CPOs)
The Clerk of the Board read the proclamation into the record.
Andrew Singelakis invited everyone to the Public Works Fair that will be held at the Washington Square Mall on May 14 and 15, 2011 from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. He stated that the event is sponsored by the Department of Land Use and Transportation, Clean Water Services, ODOT and the Joint Water Commission.
It was moved to proclaim May 15 through 21, 2011 as National Public Works Week in Washington County.
Motion – Terry 2nd – Rogers Vote – 5-0
Commissioner Schouten commented that public works make the difference of being a first world country or being in the third world.
5. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 5.a. MO 11-97 Appoint Members to the Washington County Aging and Veteran Services Advisory Council
It was moved to appoint Young Nelson and Ian Johnson as new members to the Aging and Veteran Services Advisory Council to terms ending 6/30/14.
Motion – Schouten 2nd – Malinowski Vote – 5-0
6. ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION 6.a. MO 11-98 Report on Current Commissioner District Population Figures (All CPOs)
Rich Hobernicht stated that Section 84 of the Washington County Charter provides for reapportionment of Commissioner district boundaries whenever the decennial census figures show that any district is more than 115 percent of the population of any other district. He said that analysis of the 2010 census data indicates the reapportionment as defined by Washington County Charter will not be required since the difference is 6.85%. Mr. Hobernicht requested that the Board receive the findings on Commissioner district population based on the 2010 census and direct Assessment and Taxation to publish legal notice of the population distribution in a newspaper of general circulation in the county.
Commissioner Schouten asked for a legal analysis of this matter.
Dan Olsen responded that the Washington County Charter provides that the Board receive a report, such as the one received today. He said that if the report indicates that the discrepancy between any two districts is greater than 15%, then the Board is required to bring that discrepancy down among the districts to less than 10%. Mr. Olsen stated that in this case, for the first time to his knowledge, the discrepancy actually is less than 10% so the Charter does not authorize the Board to take any action regarding re- districting. He said that the Board’s authority to re-district, as indicated in the Explanatory Statement to the Ballot Title for the Charter, is dependent upon that discrepancy occurring. Mr. Olsen reiterated that in this case, we have not met the trigger.
Chair Duyck stated for the record that that may be something the Board wants to re-visit in the future if the Charter is re-visisted because as the County’s population increases, the number of individuals that are in one or two percent difference between one district and another continues to increase and becomes more and more significant. He said that this is something that we should take into consideration.
It was moved to:
Receive the findings on Commissioner district population distribution based on the 2010 Census; and Direct Assessment and Taxation to publish a legal notice of the population distribution in a newspaper of general circulation in the county.
Motion – Malinowski 2nd – Terry Vote – 5-0
7. ORAL COMMUNICATION (5 MINUTE OPPORTUNITY)
Tom Black, 870 NW Garibaldi Street, Hillsboro, Oregon, reviewed that last week, he reported to the Board on a presentation at a CPO 9 meeting by a veterans’ representative. He said that he was correct in how that message was portrayed. Mr. Black stated that the presentation indicated that the pavers would be for veterans of Washington County only. He preferred to include all volunteers, including veterans. Mr. Black wanted to see the names of those people who have been the guiding force to get the new facility built on the Fairgrounds.
Mr. Black requested an update relative to Scoggins Dam. He said that he attended a Town Hall Meeting held by Representative Wu and he did not seem to have much information regarding progress on Scoggins Dam. Mr. Black stated that Scoggins Dam is significant because water is a primary need of man and when we grow forward, we will need that dam expanded. He understood that raising it 30 to 40 feet would double our capacity to 50 million acre feed. Mr. Black noted that we cannot dummy down the
seismic requirement for public safety purposes. He wanted to know where we are at and what we have to accomplish. Mr. Black was aware that Board members have taken trips to Washington, D.C. He asked if they are involving our representatives, such as David Wu, who can secure the dollars. Mr. Black wanted to know about the timing also. He said that the last assessment he was given was by Tom Brian last summer. Mr. Black believed that it would be appropriate to let people know where we are going with this.
Chair Duyck noted that Mr. Black asked several questions and that this is not the appropriate forum for a full presentation on the dam. He said that the County has spoken in several forums about the progress of the dam and that it is important to the Board. Chair Duyck stated that the Board tries to keep the public up to date. He said that that information is available if Mr. Black would like it.
Commissioner Schouten stated that while we can see that this dam race is going to take longer than had been thought a few years ago, he was encouraged by a presentation last week of the business case for sustainability. He said that General Manager Greg DiLoreto from the Tualatin Valley Water District noted over that over the last few years, there has been a dramatic decrease in the amount of water consumed on an average by a family. Commissioner Schouten stated that considerable conservation has been going on, including less irrigation of landscaping in the summer months, more water efficient facilities and appliances in the home, etc. He said that this water district consists of 200,000 residents or users. Commissioner Schouten stated that as a result of this, we have a couple of more years to work on this.
8. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair Duyck announced that next week will be an all day Work Session. He said that the Board will conduct interviews in Executive Session for the position of County Counsel in the morning. Chair Duyck stated that there will then be a presentation from the Sheriff in the afternoon.
9. ADJOURNMENT: 10:37 a.m.
Motion – Terry 2nd – Malinowski Vote – 5-0
MINUTES APPROVED THIS ____ DAY ______2011
______RECORDING SECRETARY CHAIR