BOC Agenda 03-18-2014 - Washington County, Oregon...2014/03/18 · 15 4. PROCLAMATION a. Proclaim March 2014 as “Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month” in Washington County

March 18, 2014 10:00 a.m.

11

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, Mr. Duyck was employed as a machinist/foreman 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 from January 1994 through December 2010. His current term as Chair runs through December 2014.

2016.

ecember 2016.

Dick Schouten, District 1 Commissioner: County Commissioner Dick Schouten has represented Aloha, Beaverton and Cooper Mt. area since June of 2000. Mr. 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 represented The Make Our Park Whole Committee, which helpedobtain a 22-acre addition to the Tualatin Hills Nature Park. In 2003, he was awarded Oregon Parks

Providers' "Legislator of the Year." Mr. Schouten serves on: the Board of Clean Water Services, Centro CulturalBoard of Directors, Metro’s Active Transportation Council, Homeless Plan Advisory Committee and Regional Disaster Preparedness Organization Board. Mr. Schouten's current term runs through December

Greg Malinowski, District 2 Commissioner: District 2 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. Commissioner Malinowski 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, Mr. 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. Mr. Malinowski holds an associate’s degree in electronics servicing technology from Portland Community College. Commissioner Malinowski also serves on the Board of Clean Water Services. Mr. Malinowski's term runs from January 2011 through December 2014.

Roy Rogers, District 3 Commissioner: Commissioner Rogers represents District 3, which includes the cities of Tigard, Tualatin, King City and Sherwood. Certified Public Accountant, Mr. Rogers is a partner in the firm of Pauly Rogers & Company PC, one of the largest municipal auditors in the State of Oregon. Mr. Rogers’ other governmental experience includes the Washington County Clean Water Services Board; Mayor, City of Tualatin (1978-1985); President, Oregon Mayor's Association; Metro Policy Committee on Transportation Study; and League of Oregon Cities Committees. Roy Rogers has served on the Board of Commissioners since January 1985. His current term runs through D

Bob Terry, District 4 Commissioner and Vice Chair: District 4 Commissioner Bob Terry represents a large portion of the rural area of Washington County including Banks, Cornelius, Forest Grove, Gaston, Hillsboro, and North Plains. Since 1996, Mr. 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, Mr. Terry served in the U.S. Navy from 1962 to 1966, including deployment aboard the supercarrier USS America. At the end of his military service, Mr. Terry resumed his education at the University of Chicago. Commissioner

Terry’s community and government experience includes service as: Past chair, A Child’s Place education and childcare center; Past chair and president, Hillsboro Chamber of Commerce; Past chair and founder, the Oregon International Airshow in Hillsboro; Past President, the Oregon Association of Nurseries; Board member and chair, the Investment Committee, American Nursery and Landscape Association; Vice president, Agri-Business Council of Oregon; Charter council member, Tualatin Watershed Council; Past board member, Regional Investment Board; Past secretary, Washington County Budget Committee for 10 years; Commissioner Terry also serves on the Board of Clean Water Services. Mr. Terry's term runs from January 2011 through December 2014.

22

http://www.cleanwaterservices.org/

TABLE OF CONTENTS

COMMISSIONER DISTRICTS 7

OTHER COUNTY AND CWS CONTACTS 7

MEETINGS AND SCHEDULES Current Meeting Schedule 8

Regular Business Meetings 8

Worksessions 8

Second Tuesdays of the Month 8

Board Meetings When There is a Fifth Tuesday in a Month 8

Executive Sessions 8

Once the Regular Business Meeting Begins 9

Ordinance Testimony Time Limits 9

Alternatives to Televised Proceedings 10

Assistive Listening Devices 10

Sign Language and Interpreters 10

Meeting Protocol 10

Additional Meeting Materials 10

Meeting Calendar 11

HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS

1. ORAL COMMUNICATION (2-Minute Opportunity)

2. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes – February 4, 2014 (click to access electronic copy)

a. Accept Fiscal Year 2012-13 Housing Authority Annual Financial Report (CPO All)

13

3. ORAL COMMUNICATION (5-Minute Opportunity)

4. BOARD OF DIRECTORS ANNOUNCEMENTS

5. ADJOURNMENT

33

http://www.co.washington.or.us/BOC/Meetings/upload/HA-Minutes-020414.pdf

1. ORAL COMMUNICATION Limited to two minutes per individual; ten minutes total.

2. CONSENT AGENDA The items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and will all be adopted in

one motion unless a Board member 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.

3. PRESENTATION

a. Auditor’s Report on Executive Expenses 15

4. PROCLAMATION

a. Proclaim March 2014 as “Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month” in

Washington County 35

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS – LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION

a. Proposed Ordinance No. 780 – An Ordinance Amending the Sunset West

Community Plan Relating to Area of Special Concern #11 (CPO 1) 37

b. Consider the Transportation Development Tax Discount (CPO All) 39

6. ACTION – LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION

a. Adopt Findings for Ordinance No. 780 (CPO 1) 51

7. ORAL COMMUNICATION

8. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS

9. ADJOURNMENT

44

CONSENT AGENDA

MINUTES (Available electronically and at the Clerk’s Desk)

February 18, 2014

February 25, 2014

CLEAN WATER SERVICES

a. Award Contract to Construct the Rock Creek AWWTF Headworks

Improvement Project No. 6602 to 2KG Contractors, Inc. (CPO 9) 53

b. Approve Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Beaverton to Relocate

Clean Water Services’ Tektronix Forcemain as Part of the Hocken Avenue Bridge and Street Improvements at Beaverton Creek Project (CPO 1)

55

c. Award Contract to Construct the Fernhill South Wetlands Project No. 6405 to

C&M Excavation and Utilities, LLC (CPO 15) 57

d. Adopt Resolution and Order Approving Amendments to Clean Water

Services' Purchasing Rules (CPO All) 59

e. Award Contract for Federal Government Affairs Consulting Services to Van

Scoyoc Associates, Inc. 63

LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION

f. Approve Establishment of a Road Maintenance Local Improvement District

(MLID) for Blanton Gardens (CPO 6) 65

g. Approve Establishment of a Road Maintenance Local Improvement District

(MLID) for North Bethany Creek (CPO 7) 77

h. Approve Declaration of Necessity and Protective Rent Payments for Right-of-

Way Acquisition for the NW Brookwood Parkway-NW Meek-NE Shute Road Project (CPO 8 & 9)

89

i. Vacate a Portion of a Permanent Drainage Easement and an Ingress and

Egress Easement Described in Parcel VI of Deed Document No. 90048906, Vacation 499 (CPO 5)

97

j. Approve Metro-County Intergovernmental Agreement for Construction Excise

Tax Grant to Fund the Concept Planning of Area 93 (CPO 1 & 7) 105

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

k. Approve Agreement with Health Share of Oregon for the Implementation of

Healthy Homes Asthma Intervention Home Visit Program 107

l. Approve Contract Amendment with TNT Fiscal Intermediary Services to

Provide Services for Persons with Developmental Disabilities 109

m. Approve Contract with Big Brothers Big Sisters Columbia Northwest for

Mentor Services 111

55

http://www.co.washington.or.us/BOC/Meetings/upload/Minutes-021814.pdf

http://www.co.washington.or.us/BOC/Meetings/upload/Minutes-022514.pdf

SUPPORT SERVICES

n. Accept Bid/Award Contract for Painting Services 113

o. Approve Resolution and Order Amending the Fiscal Year 2013-14 Pay Plan to

Add a New Classification Titled Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager and Establishing Its Pay Range and to Adjust the Salary Range of the Deputy County Administrator Classification

115

p. Accept Proposal and Award Contract for Financial Audit Services (CPO All) 119

q. Authorize Sale of Real Property Described as 1S536AB02100 to David H.

Patterson (CPO 11) 121

r. Authorize Private Sale of County-Owned Real Property Described as

2S129BC, Tax Lots 90960, 91070, 91130, 91260, 91270, 91280, 91290, 91300, 91310, and 91320 to Hunter’s Ridge Home Owner’s Association (CPO 5)

123

SERVICE DISTRICT FOR LIGHTING

s. Form Assessment Area, Authorize Maximum Annual Assessment, and Impose

a First Year Assessment for Blanton Gardens (CPO 6) 125

t. Form North Bethany Service District for Lighting, Create Assessment Area,

Authorize Maximum Annual Assessment, and Impose a First Year Assessment for North Bethany Creek (CPO 7)

135

u. Form Assessment Area, Authorize Maximum Annual Assessment, and Impose

a First Year Assessment for Montessori School (CPO 6) 147

PULLED

66

COMMISSIONER DISTRICTS (Chairman Serves Countywide)

OTHER COUNTY AND CWS CONTACTS Robert Davis, County Administrator 846-8685 Don Bohn, Assistant County Administrator

Rob Massar, Assistant County Administrator 846-8685

County Departments District Attorney, Robert Hermann 846-8671 Assessment & Taxation, Elections, Rich Hobernicht

846-8741 Health & Human Services, Rod Branyan Including Animal Services, Disability, Aging and Veterans Services

846-4402

Auditor, John Hutzler 846-8798 Housing Services, Val Valfre, Director 846-4794

Community Corrections, Steve Berger 846-3400 Juvenile, Lynne Schroeder 846-8861 Community Development, Jennie Proctor 846-8814 Land Use and Transportation, Andrew

Singelakis, Director 846-4530

Cooperative Library, Eva Calcagno 846-3222 Sheriff, Pat Garrett 846-2700 County Counsel, Alan Rappleyea 846-8747 Support Services, Don Bohn 846-8685

Clean Water Services William Gaffi, General Manager 681-3600 Diane Taniguchi-Dennis, Deputy General

Manager 681-3602

Jerry Linder, General Counsel 681-3645 Mark Jockers, Government and Public Affairs Manager

681-4450

77

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

88

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.

Oral Communication (for any items not scheduled for a public hearing): This is the time when members of the audience may step forward at the start of the meeting to address the Board. This opportunity is time-limited to two minutes per individual and a maximum of 10 minutes total per topic regarding items not scheduled for public hearing. 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.

Consent Agenda: The items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and will all be adopted in one motion unless a Board member 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.

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 any items not scheduled for public hearing): 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

99

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 503-846-8685 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 number as listed above: 503-846-8685). 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. For testimony at public hearings, write down your address and state your name 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.

Additional Meeting Materials Documents identified as Clerk’s Desk Items are available during the meeting with the Board Clerk. Anyone wishing to view Clerk’s Desk Items electronically can click on the active link provided in the Board agenda. Documents identified as Attachments are part of the agenda.

1010

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING CALENDAR

Tuesday, March 18, 2014 Worksession – 8:30 a.m.

Board Meeting – 10:00 a.m.

Tuesday, March 25, 2014 Worksession – 2:00 p.m.

Board Meeting – 6:30 p.m.

Tuesday, April 1, 2014 Worksession – 8:30 a.m.


Tuesday, April 8, 2014 Extended Worksession – 8:30 a.m.

Tuesday, April 15, 2014 Worksession – 8:30 a.m.


1111

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

1212

AGENDA

BOARD OF DIRECTORS HOUSING AUTHORITY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY

Agenda Category: Consent – Housing Authority (CPO All) Agenda Title: ACCEPT FISCAL YEAR 2012-13 HOUSING AUTHORITY

ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Presented by: Adolph A. Valfre, Jr., Executive Director SUMMARY: The audit firm of Talbot Korvola and Warwick, LLP (TKW) completed their audit field work for the Housing Authority’s 2012-13 fiscal year in December 2013. The Financial Statements meet the reporting requirements of the Governmental Finance Officer’s Association (GFOA) and the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and includes the unqualified opinion of the auditors. TKW did not issue a letter of recommendations this year. The Audit Committee met with the TKW and County and Authority staff on Wednesday, January 8th to review the report, along with other Washington County financial reports and related disclosures. The published report is available on the County’s website, and hard copies of the report have been provided to the County Board of Commissioners along with other County audit materials, and have been distributed to other Housing Authority Board members concurrently.

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Accept the Housing Authority’s Report on Audit of Financial Statements for fiscal year 2012-13.

COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDATION:I concur with the requested action.

Agenda Item No. HA 2.a.

Date: 03/18/14

1313


1414

AGENDA

WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

Agenda Category: Presentation – County Auditor Agenda Title: AUDITOR’S REPORT ON EXECUTIVE EXPENSES Presented by: John Hutzler, County Auditor SUMMARY The County Charter, Section 46 (b) 1, provides that the County Auditor shall report the results of his evaluations, including recommendations and the County Administrator’s response, to the Board. The County Auditor will report the results of his Audit of Executive Expenses, including recommendations and the County Administrator’s response to the those recommendations. Attachment: Audit of Executive Expenses Final Report

Agenda Item No. 3.a.

Date: 03/18/14

1515

Office of the Auditor 155 N First Avenue, Suite 310, MS 31 · Hillsboro, OR 97124-3072

phone: (503) 846-8798 · fax: (503) 846-8895 website: www.co.washington.or.us · e-mail: [email protected]

February 24, 2014 TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: John Hutzler, County Auditor SUBJECT: Audit of Executive Expenses Attached is the County Auditor’s report on Executive Expenses together with the response of the County Administrator. This audit was included in our FY13 audit plan. We reviewed a sample of executive expenses from FY10 through FY12 and the expenses of the executive who received the highest reimbursements. We noted instances of non-compliance with County policies in effect at the time expenses were incurred and made recommendations to improve the County’s travel and executive reimbursement processes. We thank the County Administrator for his prompt and comprehensive response to our recommendations. He has indicated that he will take steps to implement our recommendations, and has provided completion dates for implementation. In addition, since the Auditor’s Office cannot independently audit the expenses of the County Auditor, we have requested that the CAO direct the Finance Department to audit those expenses. The CAO may also choose to provide your Board with additional context and perspective that may explain more fully its understanding of the circumstances that resulted in the exceptions noted in our report. We have been, and will continue to be, responsive to CAO requests to review the supporting evidence for our findings. We undertook this audit at the request of a member of your Board who wanted to reassure the public that Board expenses are reasonable, appropriate, consistent with County policy, and subject to independent review. Inappropriate expenditures of public tax dollars for travel by public officials can erode confidence in government. Because it can be difficult for employees to question the expenses of their superiors, an independent review can reassure your Board and the public that appropriate controls are in place and expenses incurred are not extravagant. However, travel and business expenses represent a very small part of County expenditures. Efficiency and effectiveness audits of larger, more costly County programs are more likely to positively impact the County’s financial condition. Public disclosure of travel expenses might be a more effective and efficient way to reassure the public than regular audits by the County Auditor’s Office. I invite your Board to consider adopting a program similar to that of El Paso County, TX. As the Oregonian recently reported, El Paso County publishes regular reports of County travel expenses. In the Oregonian’s unscientific on-line poll following that story, 82% of respondents supported the idea that governments should make taxpayer-funded travel documents available online. I have chosen to publish my travel and business expenses on the Auditor’s Office website. We would like to thank the Finance Department, especially Roger Dawes and Florina Jones, for their cooperation and assistance with this audit. Audit Team: County Auditor: John Hutzler, CIA, CGAP, CCSA

Auditor Assigned: Mona Rabii, CIA, CISA, CGAP Reviewer: Latham Stack, CIA, CGAP

16

Washington County Auditor’s Office

Audit of Executive Expenses

Final Report

February 24, 2014

John Hutzler, CIA, CGAP, CCSA County Auditor

17

Executive Summary - Audit of Executive Expenses

Why we audited executive expenses Inappropriate expenditures of public tax dollars for travel by public officials can erode confidence in government. Appropriate controls can reassure the public that travel serves the public interest and expenses are not extravagant. It is difficult for those working under executives to approve, deny, or question expenses. Independent auditors should periodically review those expenses. The County Auditor had not previously audited the expenses of County executives. At the suggestion of a County Commissioner, we included this audit in our plan for FY12-13.

We conducted this audit to determine whether controls over executive travel and business expenses were well designed and operating effectively. We examined whether expenses were properly reviewed and authorized, adequately supported, and incurred and paid according to County policies.

What we found County executives incur expenses for business travel, professional dues, training and local meals. The County pays expenses that have a County purpose and serve the public interest.

County processes for managing travel and business expenses include proper segregation of duties and adequate monitoring controls, such as detailed review of expense reimbursement claims prior to payment and random audits of County P-card charges.

However, those controls did not always ensure compliance. Some executive transactions lacked proper authorization. Others lacked adequate supporting documentation. Several appeared inappropriate or questionable under County policy.

The county does not require travelers to submit a final settlement of trip expenses.

The County did not always report business expenses in the proper accounting period or accrue for incurred expenses at fiscal year-end.

Executive expenses for professional dues, training and subscriptions were directly related to the functions of their office or position.

What we recommend Executives should improve documentation of travel by providing a detailed description of public purpose and benefit for every travel event. When travel must be authorized by the CAO, the traveler should obtain that authorization before incurring expenses.

County policy should require that employees book travel through travel liaisons. County employees should avoid paying and receiving reimbursement for the airfare and accommodations of others.

A final trip settlement, including all costs incurred, should be completed within a reasonable time after the trip. When the actual cost significantly exceeds the cost authorized before travel, the approving authority should authorize the additional expense.

Executives should improve documentation of meal expenses by consistently providing detailed descriptions of business purpose, identifying participants by name, and providing itemized receipts for every meal.

The County should budget and account for local meal expenses separately from travel expenses and monitor the reasonableness of executives’ local meal expenses.

The County should establish reasonable time limits on the submission of expenses for reimbursement.

The County Administrator should clearly document his reasons for granting exceptions to County travel and expense policies.

18


Final Report February 24, 2014

Background

The County Auditor had not previously conducted an audit of the business expenses of County executives. At the suggestion of a County Commissioner, we included this audit in our plan for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013 (FY13). The County’s executive management team includes the Board of Commissioners, District Attorney, Sheriff, County Auditor1 County Administrator, Assistant County Administrators, County Counsel, appointed Department Directors, Government Relations Manager, and others designated by the County Administrator. The 22 members of the executive management team comprise about 1.2% of the County’s employees. All government officials in Oregon must abide by the Government Ethics Law. In addition, Washington County establishes standards for travel and business expenses through policies adopted by the Board of Commissioners and implemented by County Administration. 2 County executives may incur expenses for business travel, professional dues, training, and local business meals. The County pays expenses that have a County purpose and serve the public interest. County policies establish travel authorization, expense reimbursement and payment processes. They specify allowable expenses, required forms and supporting documentation. These policies apply to all County employees, including elected officials and other executives. Exceptions may be granted when they are in the best interest of the County and are requested in writing. The County Administrator has final authority for administering, interpreting and applying travel and business expense policies. The County Administrator’s Office (CAO) indicated that it holds executives who report directly to the County Administrator to a standard that is well within the allowable limits of County policy. Elected officials, on the other hand, are accountable not to the County Administrator, but to their constituents.

1 To preserve the independence of the audit process, we excluded the expenses of the County Auditor from the scope

of this audit. The County Auditor is subject to audit by the Finance Department. 2 County policies governing travel and business expenses were revised in February 2013, after the period under

review. We assessed compliance with policies in effect at the time expenses were incurred.

19



Employee travel and business expenses represent less than 0.5% of the County’s operating budget. The executive management team incurred about $190,000 (4.5%) of the County’s $4.2 million in employee business expenses during the period July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2012 (FY10-FY12). The executive management team averaged about $2,900 per person per year in business expenses. Travel expenses, including local business meals, accounted for two-thirds of executive expenses.(Figure 1)

Figure 1- Executive Management Expenses by Expense Type FY10-FY12

Executives may either charge expenses to a County P-card or receive reimbursement from the County for expenses they paid. Some executive expenses, such as professional dues, conference registrations or hotel fees may be paid directly to the vendor through the County’s accounts payable process.3 P-card charges accounted for 34% of total executive expenses. (Figure 2)

3 Our review of internal controls did not include a review of the accounts payable process.

9% 6%

17%

67%

Dues andmembership

Private mileage

Training andeducation

Travel and localbusiness meals

20



Figure 2- Executive Management Expenses by Payment Type FY10-FY12

Findings and Recommendations

Payment and Reimbursement

Processes

Allowable expenses include travel expenses (transportation, lodging, meals and per diem), professional dues, training fees, subscriptions and local business meals. Expenses must have a County purpose and serve the public interest. Expenditures that violate the law or are an inappropriate use of the public’s tax dollar are prohibited. Employees may use their personal funds to pay for business expenses and request reimbursement from the County. To ensure the County reimburses employees only for allowable expenses, employees must submit an Expense Details Report supported by receipts for all expenses. Department management approves the report and forwards it to the Finance Department. The Finance Department reviews submitted materials to confirm that travel was properly authorized and expenses were properly approved. The department also ensures that supporting documentation is adequate, costs are allocated to the correct accounts, and expense descriptions are clear, before releasing the request for payment.

Executives may obtain a County P-card and use it to pay business expenses. An authorized department employee may also pay expenses for department executives using a County P-

34%

66%

Charged to P-Card

Paid by Check

21



card. The County receives rebates on P-card purchases. County policy provides that P-cards should be used whenever possible. Each cardholder receives a monthly statement of charges. The cardholder must prepare a P-card transaction summary and reconcile it to the bank statement. The cardholder must sign the transaction summary and the bank statement, and must attach a receipt or invoice to support each charge. An authorized department employee must approve transactions and sign the transaction summary before sending it to the Finance Department for processing. The Finance Department audits a sample of P-card reconciliations each month to confirm that expenses were properly authorized and allowable under County policy. The Finance Department resolves issues with the cardholder, the department, or the CAO. We concluded that the County travel and business expense processes include appropriate segregation of duties and adequate process controls. However, as described below, those controls did not always ensure compliance with County policies and procedures.

Dues, training, and subscriptions

Executive expenses for professional dues, training and subscriptions averaged about $21,000 per year. We found that expenses incurred were directly related to the functions of the executive’s office or position. Travel associated with training must also comply with County travel policies.

Travel Authorization

Employee travel must be authorized in advance. Elected officials, the County Administrator and County Counsel may authorize their own travel. Department directors may self-authorize travel within Oregon and Washington that does not involve an overnight stay. All other executive travel must be authorized by the CAO. Forty-four (44) tested expenses involved travel that required CAO authorization. For 12 (27%) of those expenses, we found no evidence that travel had been authorized by the CAO. Travel expenses must have a public purpose and serve the public interest. We noted that travelers often failed to document that their attendance at a conference or event would serve a public purpose.

22



A clear statement of public purpose provides the basis for any required CAO authorization of travel. It documents that the trip does not violate the public trust placed in government officials. Reimbursed expenses lacking proper authorization and a clear statement of business purpose could also be treated as taxable fringe benefits by the Internal Revenue Service. County executives should improve documentation of their travel by providing a detailed description of public purpose and benefit for every travel event. When travel must be authorized by the CAO, the traveler should obtain that authorization before incurring expenses.

Trip Settlement The county does not require travelers to submit a final settlement of trip expenses. Since expenses for a single trip may be paid and processed in different ways at different times (e.g. by P-card and by employee reimbursement), management may not be informed when the total actual cost of a trip significantly exceeds the cost authorized before travel. There is also a risk that duplicate payments could go undetected. We recommend that a final trip settlement, including all costs incurred, be completed within a reasonable time after the trip ends. The final settlement should reflect the difference between the actual cost of the trip and the estimate approved prior to travel. When the actual cost significantly exceeds the cost authorized prior to travel, the approving authority should authorize the additional expense.

Local Business Meals According to IRS rules, local (non-travel) meal expenses must be business related, properly documented and paid according to County policy to be excludable from wages. County policy provides that the County will pay for local meals only if the meal has a business purpose. Expenses for local meals must be reasonable and necessary. County funds may not be used to purchase alcohol. Employees must submit a detailed receipt and a list of participants. They must document the business purpose of the meal. For 35% of local meals examined, executives did not submit itemized receipts. Without itemized receipts, we were unable to confirm the number of guests, the reasonableness of costs, and that the County had not paid for alcohol. Executives did not always provide a business purpose or identify their guests.

23



County executives should improve documentation of their meals expenses by consistently providing a detailed description of business purpose, identifying participants by name, and providing itemized receipts for every meal event.

Unallowable or Questionable Expenses

Mileage Reimbursement

Non-employee expense

Lodging expense

Per diem expense

Overall, we considered 4% of total travel and business expenses sampled to be unallowable or questionable. The County encourages employees to use County vehicles for County business. Employees may also request mileage reimbursement for using personal vehicles for County business. We found that mileage reimbursement was paid at rates established by the Internal Revenue Service. As an alternative to mileage reimbursement, members of the executive management team receive a monthly personal vehicle allowance (PVA) as a part of compensation. PVA recipients may not use County vehicles without CAO approval. They may not claim mileage reimbursement for use of their personal vehicle on County business, except for approved business travel beyond a 100-mile radius of their assigned duty station. We found that four of thirty-one mileage reimbursements reviewed (13%) were payments to PVA recipients for travel within the 100-mile radius. County policy provides that the County will not pay costs for family members to attend a function honoring an employee. Payment for the dinner of a family member of a public official, at an event such as an annual banquet, is also a violation of the Oregon Government Ethics Law. We found that one former elected official had charged to the County the cost of award banquet tickets for family members of the employees being honored. County policy provides that allowable lodging costs on trips requiring overnight stay are single room rates unless the room is shared by another County employee. We tested thirty-two lodging expenses and found two payments for former elected officials staying in two-bedroom suites, with no documentation that the suites were shared with other employees. County policy provides that meals included in the registration fee for an event may not be claimed separately for reimbursement or per diem. We tested nineteen per diem payments. We found that on one occasion a former elected

24



Class upgrade

official claimed full per diem rates for days on which some meals were included in the conference registration fee. Prior to 2013, County policy provided that employees must pay charges for class upgrades and itinerary or booking changes, unless they were required to meet business needs of the County or resulted from unusual circumstances such as an emergency. We noted that the CAO had approved a reimbursement to an elected official for a class upgrade without clear documentation of a business need of the County or unusual circumstance such as an emergency.4 We have provided the CAO with the details on each of the unallowable or questionable expenses described above. We recommend that the CAO review them and take action as appropriate. We recommend that the CAO clearly document its reasons for granting exceptions to County policies.

Former Elected Official

We noted that one former elected official had been reimbursed more than $43,000 for travel expenses during the 18-month period July 2009 through the end of his term in January 2011. We decided to take a closer look at the spending and reporting practices of this official.

Travel Expenses We observed that his expense reimbursements were higher because he often paid the expenses of other County officials travelling with him. Although we were unable to determine how much of the $43,000 in reimbursements was for his own expenses, we estimated that on one trip to Washington DC, only 25% of the nearly $7,000 reimbursement was for his own expenses. We noted that he incurred and received reimbursement for travel expenses for employees whose travel should have been authorized by the CAO. We did not find travel authorizations to support requests for reimbursement of those expenses. To increase accountability for travel expenses, we recommend that County employees avoid paying and receiving reimbursement for the airfare and accommodations of others.

Timeliness

of reporting

Another reason this official’s reimbursements were higher is that he submitted expenses for reimbursement as much as eleven months after they were incurred. As a result he was

4 Current policy does not specify the circumstances justifying class upgrades. It provides only that exceptions may

be granted on a case-by-case basis. We assessed compliance with the policy in effect at the time the expense was incurred.

25



reimbursed during his last 18 months in office for 24 months of expenses. Government Accounting Standards, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and Washington County policy require that operating expenses be recognized and accrued when they are incurred As a result of this official’s late submissions, $8,000 of expenses were recorded in the wrong accounting period, because the proper period had been closed. We recommend that the County establish reasonable time limits on the submission of expenses for reimbursement.

Travel Benefits The ethics law’s prohibition against using one’s official position to obtain a financial gain applies to travel benefits, such as mileage awards, earned in the course of government business, unless a public body formally adopts such benefits as a part of an official’s compensation package. The Washington County Board of Commissioners adopted a Resolution and Order (R&O) allowing County employees to accrue travel benefits on County business as a part of compensation. The R&O prohibited employees from making travel arrangements to maximize this benefit to the detriment of the County. The County does not prohibit the use of personal credit cards. County policy now provides that P-cards should be used whenever possible. The County earns rebates from the use of County P-cards. This official booked his own travel, and that of other County employees travelling with him, with airlines and hotels that awarded him travel benefits. He increased those benefits by using personal credit cards to pay travel, lodging and meal expenses for himself and other County employees. The County did not receive P-card rebates on those expenses. His actions could be seen as an abuse of the benefit. We recommend that executives book travel through their travel liaison and use County P-cards to avoid any appearance that they abused the benefit granted by the Board.

Business Meals This official regularly conducted business over meals at County expense. He spent an average of over $500 per month on local business meals. In a single month he spent nearly $1,000 for 26 meals. No other executive approached this level of meal expenses. Although he documented a business purpose for each meal, listed the attendees, and often deducted an amount for alcohol from his request for reimbursement, he did not submit itemized

26



receipts for any of the local business meals we examined. Without itemized receipts, we were unable to confirm the number of meals purchased, the reasonableness of costs, and the exclusion of all alcohol costs. When an elected official incurs expenses at a level that could be perceived as excessive, proper documentation can reassure the public that expenses incurred are an appropriate expenditure of public tax dollars. We recommend that County executives provide itemized receipts for local business meal expenses. County policy, as revised in 2013, clarifies that an itemized breakdown of meal charges must be provided. We also recommend that the County budget and account for local meal expenses separately from travel expenses and monitor the reasonableness of executives’ local meal expenses.

Summary of Recommendations

County executives should improve documentation of their travel by providing a detailed description of public purpose and benefit for every travel event. When travel must be authorized by the CAO, the traveler should obtain that authorization before incurring expenses. County policy should require that employees book travel through travel liaisons. County employees should avoid paying and receiving reimbursement for the airfare and accommodations of others. A final trip settlement, including all costs incurred, should be completed within a reasonable time after the trip. When the actual cost of a trip significantly exceeds the cost authorized prior to travel, the approving authority should authorize the additional expense. County executives should improve documentation of their meals expenses by consistently providing a detailed description of business purpose, identifying participants by name, and providing itemized receipts for every meal event. The County should budget and account for local meal expenses separately from travel expenses and monitor the reasonableness of executives’ local meal expenses.

27



The County should establish reasonable time limits on the submission of expenses for reimbursement. The County Administrator should clearly document his reasons for granting exceptions to County travel and expense policies.

Objectives, Scope and Methodology

We conducted this audit to determine whether the County’s system of controls over the travel and business expenses of County executives was well designed and operating effectively. We examined whether such expenses were (a) properly reviewed and authorized, (b) supported by adequate documentations, and (c) incurred and paid according to County policies. The County’s executive management team includes the Board of Commissioners, District Attorney, Sheriff, County Auditor5 County Administrator, Assistant County Administrators, County Counsel, appointed Department Directors, Government Relations Manager, and others designated by the County Administrator. We reviewed relevant Washington County policies, the business expense policies of the State of Oregon, Multnomah County and the City of Portland, and the Internal Revenue Service fringe benefit guide for federal, state, and local government. We interviewed County staff involved in reviewing and processing expenses for payment or reimbursement. We observed County training on processing expenses. We reviewed all expenses for dues, subscriptions, education and training incurred by the executive management team from FY10 through FY12 for relevance to the executive’s responsibilities. We selected from the general ledger a judgmental sample of 146 travel and business expenses incurred by or on behalf of members of the executive management team that had been paid during the three-year period, July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2012 (FY10-FY12). Our sample represented 25% (about

5 To preserve the independence of the audit process, we excluded the expenses of the County Auditor from the scope

of this audit. The County Auditor is subject to audit by the Finance Department.

28



$48,000) of executive expenses during that period, of which 66% was reimbursed expenses and 34% was charged to County P-cards. We reviewed supporting documentation for these expenses for proper authorization, approval for payment, and compliance with County policies. We expanded our review of the expenses of a former elected official who accounted for the largest proportion of executive expenses. We conducted this audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on the audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our audit objectives.

signed:

Audit Team: County Auditor: John Hutzler, CIA, CGAP, CCSA

Auditor Assigned: Mona Rabii, CIA, CISA, CGAP Reviewer: Latham Stack, CIA, CGAP

29

303030

313131

323232

333333

343434

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Proclamation – Health and Human Services Agenda Title: PROCLAIM MARCH 2014 AS “DEVELOPMENTAL

DISABILITIES AWARENESS MONTH” IN WASHINGTON COUNTY

Presented by: Rod Branyan, Director, Department of Health and Human Services SUMMARY: An estimated 1 to 2 percent of the population has a developmental disability. One out of ten families is directly affected by developmental disabilities. As public awareness helps promote acceptance and understanding, and decrease prejudice and misconceptions, the month of March has been designated Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month. Therefore, the Department of Health and Human Services requests that the Washington County Board of Commissioners designate March 2014 as “Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month” in Washington County. Attachment: Proclamation

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Proclaim March 2014 as “Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month” in Washington County.



Date: 03/18/14

3535

Proclamation Board of Commissioners for Washington County

DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES AWARENESS MONTH March 2014

WHEREAS, disability is a natural part of the human experience, and WHEREAS, developmental disabilities in Washington County touch one of every ten families, and WHEREAS, people with developmental disabilities have many skills, talents and abilities to

contribute to their neighborhoods and communities, and WHEREAS, everyone wins when people with developmental disabilities receive the supports and

opportunities they need to be contributing members of their communities, and WHEREAS, the abilities of people with developmental disabilities have been traditionally and

systematically undervalued, and WHEREAS, public attitudes are the biggest barrier to full community integration and inclusion of

people with developmental disabilities, and WHEREAS, public awareness about developmental disabilities promotes acceptance and

understanding, and decreases prejudice and misconception, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that on this 18th day of March, 2014, the Washington County Board of Commissioners does hereby proclaim March 2014 as “Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month” in Washington County, and calls upon all citizens, government agencies, public and private institutions, business and schools in Washington County to recognize the ability of individuals with developmental disabilities to make significant contributions to their communities.

_______________________________ Andy Duyck, Chair

_______________________________ Recording Secretary

_______________________________ Minute Order

3636

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Public Hearing – First Reading and First Public Hearing Land Use & Transportation; County Counsel (CPO 1)

Agenda Title: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 780 – AN ORDINANCE

AMENDING THE SUNSET WEST COMMUNITY PLAN RELATING TO AREA OF SPECIAL CONCERN #11

Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation Alan Rappleyea, County Counsel

SUMMARY:

Ordinance No. 780 proposes to amend the Sunset West Community Plan by dividing Area of Special Concern (ASC) #11 into two new subareas, 11a and 11b. These subareas specify where different building height requirements apply within the ASC. Ordinance No. 780 is posted on the county's land use ordinance web page at the following link: http://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/Divisions/LongRangePlanning/2014-land-use-ordinances.cfm On March 5, 2014, the Planning Commission (PC) conducted a public hearing for this ordinance. The PC’s recommendation will be included in the staff report, which will be provided to the Board prior to the March 18, 2014 hearing and posted on the above land use ordinance web page. Copies of the report will be available electronically and at the Clerk’s desk prior to the hearing. Consistent with Board policy, testimony about the ordinance is limited to three minutes for individuals and twelve minutes for a representative of a group. Clerk’s Desk Item: Staff Report

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Read Ordinance No. 780 by title only and conduct the first public hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, adopt Ordinance No. 780.



Date: 03/18/14

3737

http://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/Divisions/LongRangePlanning/2014-land-use-ordinances.cfm

http://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/Divisions/LongRangePlanning/upload/Ord780_BCC_MeetingPkt_031814.pdf


3838

AGENDA

WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category: Public Hearing – Land Use & Transportation (CPO All) Agenda Title: CONSIDER THE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAX

DISCOUNT Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation SUMMARY In November 2008 voters approved the Transportation Development Tax (TDT) with the intent of doubling the charge developers pay toward transportation capital improvements. The TDT (A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 691) became effective July 1, 2009 and provided for a four-year phase-in of the rate increase. TDT rates were to increase in a stepwise fashion each year and be fully phased-in effective July 1, 2012.

Ordinance No. 729, adopted October 20, 2009, responded to poor economic conditions by providing additional discounts during the four-year phase-in: 20% in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009-10, 10% in FY 2010-11, and 5% in FY 2011-12. Because these discounts applied to stepwise increases, effective discounts were actually greater. The discounts were to be discontinued effective July 1, 2012.

A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 746, adopted January 17, 2012, froze TDT rates at the 5% discount level enacted by Ordinance No. 729 (an approximate 20% discount compared to top rates), through June 30, 2015. A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 746 requires that the Board hold a public hearing no later than April 30 in 2013 and 2014 to determine whether the discount shall be continued or terminated, and to consider the recommendation of the Washington County Coordinating Committee (WCCC) as well as economic conditions. The Board continued the discount in April 2013.

In February 2014, the WCCC voted to advise the Board to extend the discount until July 1, 2015. A memo sent to the WCCC provided information on economic conditions.

Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order 2. WCCC memo dated February 10, 2014 3. Memo with supplemental economic information, dated February 11, 2014

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: 1. Conduct a public hearing and consider whether to continue or terminate the TDT discount. 2. Authorize the Chairman to complete and sign the Resolution and Order memorializing the

action. 3. Direct staff to coordinate the action with the cities. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDATION:I concur with the requested action.

Agenda Item No. 5.b.

Date: 03/18/14

3939

Page 1 -RESOLUTION AND ORDER

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON

In the Matter of Determining the Revised ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER Transportation Development Tax (TDT) ) Rate for the 2014/15 Fiscal Year Pursuant ) No. to Washington County Code Section 3.17.175 ) This matter having come before the Board at its meeting of March 18, 2014; and

It appearing to the Board that Chapter 3.17 of the Washington County Code (WCC)

provides, at Section 3.17.175, that the Transportation Development Tax (TDT) rate phase-in

shall be reviewed no later than April 30, 2014 and the Board of Commissioners shall hold a

public hearing to determine whether the revised rate phase-in shall be continued or terminated;

and

It appearing to the Board that a hearing was held this day to determine whether the

revised rate phase-in shall continue as the TDT rate for the 2014/15 year; and

It appearing to the Board that in making its determination, WCC 3.17.175 requires the

Board to consider the recommendation of the Washington County Coordinating Committee

(WCCC), existing economic conditions, and the public interest; and

It appearing to the Board that the D epartment of Land Use and Transportation discussed

the discount TDT rate with the members of the Washington County Coordinating Committee on

February 10, 2014; now, therefore, it is

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the revised rate phase-in shall be ______________

for the 2014/15 Fiscal Year pursuant to WCC 3.17.175 effective July 1, 2014; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Department of Land Use and Transportation shall

40

Page 2 -RESOLUTION AND ORDER

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

take such actions as are necessary to effectuate this action, including prompt notification of all

cities.

DATED this 18th day of March, 2014.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON

CHAIR RECORDING SECRETARY Approved as to form: Assistant County Counsel For Washington County, Oregon Date:

41

WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON

Memorandum To: Washington County Coordinating Committee

From: Steve Szigethy, Senior Planner

Date: February 10, 2014

Re: Transportation Development Tax Rate Decision

The Transportation Development Tax (TDT) was approved by voters in 2008 with the intent of distributing the cost of transportation infrastructure improvements more equitably among property owners (through the MSTIP property tax), users of the system (through the gas tax and vehicle registration fees), and development (through the TDT). The Board of County Commissioners faces a decision no later than April 30 on whether or not to raise TDT rates on July 1 to the top level that was originally intended to be in effect in 2012. Rates will automatically rise on July 1, 2015 if rates are kept the same this year. Current rates are discounted approximately 20% off of the fully phased-in rates due to a variety of Board actions over the past five years, including the following: The original TDT ordinance (691-A) gradually stepped up rates over three years to arrive at top rates

on July 1, 2012. The top rates were to be about double what was charged under the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF).

Ordinance 729 (2009) provided an additional 20%, 10% and 5% discount during the stepping up of

rates in FY 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, respectively. Ordinance 746 (2012) delayed the final step increase and effectively kept rates 20% below the full

amount until July 1, 2015, but requires the Board to revisit the rate decision in 2013 and 2014. Responding to Ordinance 746 and advisement from the WCCC, the Board decided in 2013 to keep

rates discounted for FY 2013-14. The Board made a number of other accommodations by ordinance, including a more flexible definition for “previous use” that can be used to reduce TDT charges (Ord. 741, 2011), and an additional, temporary discount for certain changes of use that repurpose older buildings (Ord. 751, 2012). The decision to raise or maintain TDT rates for FY 2014-15 is now approaching, and the WCCC is to advise the Board on this matter. Last year, the Board asked staff to begin the discussion earlier this year, and to provide more information about economic conditions that would help inform the decision. This information is provided below. Residential Building Permits FY 2012-13 saw over 2,800 residential building permits pulled throughout Washington County, a 65% increase1 over the previous fiscal year, and the second consecutive year of gains after five years of losses. This amount is close to the FY 2006-2007 level (over 2,900 permits) but well below the decade

1 US Census Building Permits Survey, December 2013

42


Department of Land Use & Transportation · Planning and Development Services Long Range Planning

155 N First Avenue, Ste. 350 MS 14 · Hillsboro, OR 97124-3072 phone: (503) 846-3519 · fax: (503) 846-4412 · TTY: (503) 846-4598 · www.co.washington.or.us

2

high of 4,900 permits in FY 2005-2006. A graph of residential permit activity is included on the followingpage. Region

al Home Sales

ccording to Regional Multiple Listing Service (RMLS) sales numbers reported by The Oregonian, home tro area increased by 14% in 2013 compared to 2012. The total value of those

ome sales increased by 29%.2 Median sale price in the region was $265,000 in 2013, a 13% increase

Asales in the Portland mehover the previous year. Last year was the second consecutive calendar year of price and sales recovery following the housing crash.

2 The Oregonian, “Portland-area homes sales up by $1.9 billion in 2013,” http://impact.oregonlive.com/front-porch/print.html?entry=/2014/01/portland-area_home_sales_up_by.html

43

http://impact.oregonlive.com/front-porch/print.html?entry=/2014/01/portland-area_home_sales_up_by.html

http://impact.oregonlive.com/front-porch/print.html?entry=/2014/01/portland-area_home_sales_up_by.html

WASHINGTON COUNTY

OREGON

Dep

artm

ent o

f Lan

d U

se &

Tra

nspo

rtat

ion

· Pla

nnin

g an

d D

evel

opm

ent S

ervi

ces

Lon

g R

ange

Pla

nn

ing

155 N

Fir

st A

ven

ue,

Ste

. 350 M

S 1

4 · H

ills

bor

o, O

R 9

7124-3

072

ph

one:

(503) 846-3

519 ·

fax

: (5

03) 846-4

412 · T

TY

: (5

03) 846-4

598 · w

ww

.co.

was

hin

gton

.or.

us

3

44


TDT Revenue and Credits Washington County and the cities collected nearly $10.2 million in TDT cash revenue and issued $5.9 million in TDT credits for direct investments in the transportation system during FY 2012-13. Combining cash, credits and account interest, the county and cities saw $16.2 million of total TDT activity in FY 2012-13, nearly double that of the previous fiscal year. This was the third consecutive fiscal year of growth in TDT cash receipts and total TDT activity. Due to the delayed rate phase-in, TDT cash revenue was about $2.5 million below what would have been collected under the full rates (if the same amount of development had taken place).

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

TIF

199

1

TIF

199

2

TIF

199

3

TIF

199

4

TIF

199

5

TIF

199

6

TIF

199

7

TIF

199

8

TIF

199

9

TIF

200

0

TIF

200

1

TIF

200

2

TIF

200

3

TIF

200

4

TIF

200

5

TIF

200

6

TIF

200

7

TIF

200

8

TIF

200

9

TD

T 0

9-10

TD

T 1

0-11

TD

T 1

1-12

TD

T 1

2-13

CREDITS & INTERESTCASH RECEIPTS



4

45


Employment Washington County’s strong jobs base is helping lead Oregon out of the recession. The November 2013 seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of 5.9% is the lowest in the four-county Portland-Vancouver region and the third lowest in the state, trailing only Benton and Hood River counties.3 It is lower than both the statewide rate of 7.3% and the national rate of 7.0%. It is also the county’s lowest jobless rate in more than five years and a significant decrease from the November 2012 unemployment rate of 6.9%.

Source: Oregon Employment Department

Washington County employers added 6,600 jobs between November 2012 and 2013, primarily in the private sector.4 The largest gains were in professional and business services (+1,600), trade and transportation (+1,400), and construction (+1,200). The only categories to lose workers in the past year were information services and government, which each lost about 100 jobs. Washington County hosted more than 260,000 jobs in November, an all-time high. Construction Cost Index The Construction Cost Index provides an objective basis for adjusting TDT rates over time. It is a weighted index based on the three factors: change in materials costs (weighted 50%), change in labor costs (weighted 30%) and change in right-of-way costs (weighted 20%), averaged over the last five years. Even with the delayed rate phase-in caused by Ordinance 746, the Construction Cost Index is required by code to be calculated and shared with the Board before April 30 to help inform the rate change decision. In 2013, as the result of a discontinued state materials cost index, county staff worked with the WCCCTAC to reformulate the Construction Cost Index. After researching a number of alternatives and conferring with the WCCC, county staff replaced the state index with the National Highway Construction Cost Index (NHCCI). The other two components of the index, and the weighting of all three components, remain the same. The Construction Cost Index is trending downward, primarily due to a 15% drop in the NHCCI that occurred in 2009 and is still affecting the five-year running average. A rate adjustment of -1.195% would be applied to FY 2014-15 TDT rates if the Board decides to remove the discounts associated with Ordinances 729 and 746.

3 US Bureau of Labor Statistics Local Area Unemployment Statistics



5

4 Oregon Employment Department customized report for Washington County

46




6

As an example of how the Construction Cost Index affects TDT rates, the TDT charge for a single-family detached home (if discounts are removed) would be $8,036 in FY 2014-15, down from the $8,225 originally intended for FY 2012-2013. The charge is currently $6,665. If the Board chooses to keep the discounts in place for one more year, the Construction Cost Index would not affect TDT rates. Summary of TDT Relief The following list summarizes current provisions that help mitigate TDT charges: Delayed rate phase-in. The delayed rate phase-in associated with Ordinances 729 and 746 is

holding TDT rates about 20% below the top rates that were intended to become effective in 2012. Previous use deduction. Applicants may deduct a TDT amount associated with a previous use on

the site from the TDT calculated for the new use. In certain situations where the previous use was more “intense” than the new use, the TDT charge may be as low as zero.

Previous use redefined. Ordinance 741 provided further leeway for previous use deductions,

allowing applicants to deduct for uses that existed as far back as 2005 (or ten years ago starting in 2015), instead of the original three-year window.

Change of use discount. Ordinance 751 established a 50% or 75% discount on TDT charges for

applicants changing the use of a previously-occupied older building to certain commercial and industrial uses. Discounts are applied to the first 5,000 square feet of floor area, and are calculated at 50% for buildings three years or older, and 75% for buildings 20 years or older. The discount expires on June 30, 2015 if no further action is taken. Countywide, eight applicants used the discount in FY 2012-13, saving those applicants an average of $11,000 per development. Staff will continue to track participation in the discount to inform future discussions.

Deferral to occupancy. Applicants can defer the portion of their TDT payment that exceeds the

amount for a single-family home (currently $6,665) until building occupancy.

Bancroft. Applicants can finance their TDT charge at an interest rate determined by the jurisdiction based on current market rates. Washington County would use a 3.25% interest rate as of January 23. A lien is typically placed on the subject property until the charges are paid in full.

Credits. Developers that build transportation improvements or dedicate right-of-way to satisfy

conditions of approval can reduce their TDT obligation by the amount equal to the cost incurred to build or dedicate those improvements, if the facility is listed on the TDT Project List. Improvements to arterial/collector facilities not on the TDT Project List may be eligible for partial credit.

Renovations. Remodeling or replacement of structures is exempt from TDT as long as it does not

result in a net increase in trips.

47




7

WCCCTAC Discussion Staff presented this information at the WCCC Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) on January 30 for discussion. TAC members generally agreed that development activity was much more robust in 2013 but that it is unclear whether this signals a confident positive trend. One TAC member asked whether the uptick in development activity was uniform across all jurisdictions in Washington County. Staff said that while it is difficult to make such comparisons (a large commercial or industrial development in one jurisdiction could “spike” the data), that staff would share some jurisdiction-level comparisons at or before the WCCC meeting. TDT rates are uniform countywide in part to reduce competition between jurisdictions. Another TAC member reminded the group that the TAC was originally charged with taking on transportation funding issues, and that implementing the full TDT rate would be in the spirit of that charge. However, that TAC member added that jurisdictions may need to demonstrate that available TDT revenues are being invested in real projects as they consider asking for more funding. Other TAC members stated that, even with the information provided, it is difficult for agency staff to take a position on a TDT rate change and recommended bringing the TAC comments forward for discussion at the WCCC. Justin Wood of the Homebuilders Association of Metropolitan Portland, who attended the TAC meeting as a member of the public, offered his perspective on the matter. He emphasized that TDT is just one expense incurred by developers, and that several other jurisdictions or service providers in Washington County have raised or are planning to raise system development charges. In addition, he noted that building material costs such as drywall are increasing significantly. Options for WCCC Discussion and Action This agenda item is intended for WCCC discussion and potential action on February 10 or March 10.The Board of County Commissioners must hold a hearing and choose one of two options before April 30: Raise TDT rates to the fully phased-in level (subject to the Construction Cost Index), resulting in an

approximate 20% increase in TDT rates, effective July 1, 2014. Keep TDT rates discounted for FY 2014-15. Rates would then automatically rise to the fully phased-

in level (subject to the Construction Cost Index) effective July 1, 2015.

TDT Annual Report For more details on TDT activity during FY 2012-13, the TDT Annual Report can be downloaded from the county TDT website (under “Manuals and Reports”) here: http://www.co.washington.or.us/TDT

48

http://www.co.washington.or.us/TDT

WASHINGTON COUNTY Inter-Office Memorandum

DATE: Andrew Singelakis, Director

TO: Steve Szigethy, Senior Planner

FROM: February 11, 2014

SUBJECT: Transportation Development Tax (TDT) Supplemental Information

At the February 11, 2014 Board work session, Board members requested three supplemental pieces of information as context for the TDT rate change decision: Washington County home sales figures TDT revenue forgone due to the discount Participation in the Change of Use discount This information is provided below. Washington County and Regional Home Sales Figures The Portland Metropolitan Association of Realtors assembles home sales data from the Regional Multiple Listing Service (RMLS). The data is not easily broken down into counties, but rather subareas. The table below compares home sales figures for the region with that of subareas in (or partially in) Washington County.1

Pending

Home Sales, 2013

Change in Number of Pending

Home Sales, 2012-

2013

Average Sales Price,

2013

Change in Average

Sales Price, 2012-2013

Northwest Washington

County 1,362 +8.6% $395,300 +11.1%

Beaverton/Aloha

2,413 +13.7% $259,800 +18.1%

Tigard/Wilsonville

2,502 +16.5% $315,600 +10.5%

Hillsboro / Forest Grove

1,928 +9.9% $245,600 +13.6%

Portland Metropolitan

Region 27,065 +12.7% $310,600 +12.9%

1 Pending sales are used rather than closed sales in order to reflect market conditions during a precise time frame (closings typically occur months later). These figures do not include for sale by owner (FSBO) properties or direct sales from developers.

149

2

For each indicator, two Washington County subareas outperform the region and two subareas do not. However, it is safe to say that Washington County is experiencing real estate activity similar to that of the Portland metropolitan region as a whole, and that there is a strong positive trend in home sales and sales prices. “Forgone” TDT Revenue Washington County and the cities collected nearly $10.2 million in TDT cash revenue during FY 2012-13 under a rate structure that is approximately 20% below the fully phased-in rates. Put another way, the fully phased-in rates are 25% higher than current rates. Holding development activity constant, the discount resulted in about $2.5 million of forgone TDT revenue countywide. In unincorporated Washington County, that figure was about $743,000. TDT credits do not apply to these calculations. Change of Use Discount On June 19, 2012 the Board adopted Ordinance 751, establishing a TDT discount for certain building reuses. Effective July 19, 2012, the ordinance established a 50% or 75% discount on TDT for applicants changing the use of an older, previously occupied building to a different commercial use with a higher TDT obligation. Discount eligibility is limited to buildings at least three years old that are changing to a use with a TDT rate that is calculated per thousand square feet of gross floor area or gross leasable area – primarily commercial and industrial uses. Discounts are applied to the first 5,000 square feet of floor area, and are calculated at 50% for buildings three years or older, and 75% for buildings 20 years or older. The discount, which is intended to encourage small- to medium- sized renovation or redevelopment of vacant spaces, expires on June 30, 2015 if no further action is taken. In FY 2012-2013 (the first year the Change of Use Discount was available), eight applicants used the discount, including three applicants each in Hillsboro and Tigard and two applicants in unincorporated Washington County. These applicants received discounts ranging from 4% to 75% off of their original TDT calculation and 52% on average. They collectively saved $88,000, or about $11,000 per application. In the most beneficial case, a renovation of a general office building in Tigard to accommodate medical offices resulted in savings of more than $60,000 off of a TDT charge that was originally $90,000. Other examples included a conversion of a single family residence into a church, a specialty retail space into a high-turnover restaurant, and a warehouse into a light industrial operation. For more details on TDT activity during FY 2012-13, the TDT Annual Report can be downloaded from the county TDT website (under “Manuals and Reports”) here: http://www.co.washington.or.us/TDT S:\PLNG\WPSHARE\TDT\Board Agendas - 2014\TDT_ExtraInfo_021114.doc

50

http://www.co.washington.or.us/TDT

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Action – Land Use & Transportation (CPO 1) Agenda Title: ADOPT FINDINGS FOR ORDINANCE NO. 780 Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation SUMMARY:

Ordinance No. 780 amends the Sunset West Community Plan by dividing Area of Special Concern (ASC) #11 into two new subareas, 11a and 11b. These subareas specify where different building height requirements apply within the ASC. Ordinance No. 780 is posted on the county's land use ordinance web page at the following link: http://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/Divisions/LongRangePlanning/2014-land-use-ordinances.cfm Post acknowledgment comprehensive plan amendments are amendments made to the county’s Comprehensive Plan after it was acknowledged by the State Department of Land Conservation and Development as complying with the Statewide Planning Goals. ORS 197.615 requires that such amendments be accompanied by findings setting forth the facts and analysis showing that the amendments are consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Revised Statutes, State Administrative Rules and the applicable provisions of Washington County’s Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, as required by Title 8 of Metro’s Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (UGMFP), any amendment to a comprehensive plan or implementing ordinance shall be consistent with the requirements of the UGMFP. Attached is the Resolution and Order to adopt the findings for Ordinance No. 780. Prior to the March 18, 2014 meeting, the proposed findings will be provided to the Board, posted on the above land use ordinance web page, and available at the Clerk’s desk. Attachment: Resolution and Order Clerk’s Desk Item: Proposed Findings (click to access electronic copy)

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Adopt the findings for Ordinance No. 780 and authorize the Chair to sign the Resolution and Order memorializing the action.

COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDATION:

I concur with the requested action.


Date: 03/18/14

5151

http://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/Divisions/LongRangePlanning/2014-land-use-ordinances.cfm

http://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/Divisions/LongRangePlanning/upload/Ord780_BCC_MeetingPkt_031814.pdf

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28


FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON In the Matter of Adopting ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER Legislative Findings in Support ) of Ordinance No. 780 ) No. This matter having come before the Washington County Board of Commissioners at its

meeting of March 18, 2014; and

It appearing to the Board that the findings contained in Exhibit “A” summarize relevant facts

and rationales with regard to compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Revised

Statutes and Administrative Rules, Washington County’s Comprehensive Plan, and titles of Metro’s

Urban Growth Management Functional Plan relating to Ordinance No. 780; and

It appearing to the Board that the findings attached as Exhibit “A” constitute appropriate

legislative findings with respect to the adopted ordinance; and

It appearing to the Board that the Planning Commission, at the conclusion of its public hearing

on March 5, 2014, made a recommendation to the Board, which is in the record and has been

reviewed by the Board; and

It appearing to the Board that, in the course of its deliberations, the Board has considered the

record which consists of all notices, testimony, staff reports, and correspondence from interested

parties, together with a record of the Planning Commission’s proceedings, and other items submitted

to the Planning Commission and Board regarding this ordinance; it is therefore,

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the attached findings in Exhibit “A” in support of Ordinance

No. 780 are hereby adopted.

DATED this 18th day of March, 2014. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON APPROVED AS TO FORM: Chairman

_____________________________ Recording Secretary County Counsel For Washington County, Oregon

5252

AGENDA

CLEAN WATER SERVICES BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Agenda Category: Consent (CPO 9)

Agenda Title:

AWARD CONTRACT TO CONSTRUCT THE ROCK CREEK AWWTF HEADWORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 6602 TO 2KG CONTRACTORS, INC.

Presented by: Bill Gaffi, General Manager (mk)

SUMMARY

The Rock Creek Headworks Improvement Project No. 6602 (Project) consists of installing screenings channel isolation gates, a screenings passive bypass gate, and an influent sampling system, and removing and salvaging the existing channel isolation butterfly valves, to provide a complete and functional headworks facility. Clean Water Services (District) advertised for bids on January 21, 2014. The engineer’s estimate for the Project is $550,000. District received and opened seven bids on February 13, 2014. The bids range from $575,000 to $718,804. The three lowest bidders are:

1. 2KG Contractors, Inc. $575,000 2. Stettler Supply Co. $612,975 3. McClure and Sons, Inc. $629,307

The low bidder disclosed the following subcontractors:

1. Oregon Electric Group $50,817.79 2. Portland Engineering, Inc. $16,800.00

REQUESTED ACTION

Award the contract to construct the Rock Creek AWWTF Headworks Improvement Project No. 6602 to 2KG Contractors, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $575,000.


Date: 03/18/14

5353


5454

AGENDA


Agenda Category:

Consent

(CPO 1)

Agenda Title:

APPROVE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF BEAVERTON TO RELOCATE CLEAN WATER SERVICES’ TEKTRONIX FORCEMAIN AS PART OF THE HOCKEN AVENUE BRIDGE AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS AT BEAVERTON CREEK PROJECT

Presented by: Bill Gaffi, General Manager (sw) SUMMARY

City of Beaverton (City) intends to construct the Hocken Avenue Bridge and Street Improvements at Beaverton Creek (Bridge Project) to improve traffic for all modes of transportation and to improve the flow and habitat of Beaverton Creek by replacing two 84-inch culverts with a concrete slab bridge and reconstructing approximately 875 feet of roadway. Clean Water Services’ (District) Tektronix Pump Station forcemain is located in the Hocken Avenue Right-of-Way above the City’s culverts and interferes with construction of the bridge. The City will include the relocation in the Bridge Project. This Intergovernmental Agreement includes the construction cost to relocate approximately 88 feet of District’s 12-inch forcemain located in the Hocken Avenue Right-of-Way that passes above the two existing culverts in Beaverton Creek and the cost for the City to administer construction of the project. REQUESTED ACTION Approve the Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Beaverton to relocate Clean Water Services’ Tektronix Forcemain as Part of the Hocken Avenue Bridge and Street Improvements at Beaverton Creek in an amount not to exceed $270,000.

Agenda Item No. 2.b.

Date: 03/18/14

5555


5656

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent (CPO 15)

Agenda Title:

AWARD CONTRACT TO CONSTRUCT THE FERNHILL SOUTH WETLANDS PROJECT NO. 6405 TO C&M EXCAVATION AND UTILITIES, LLC

Presented by: Bill Gaffi, General Manager (jfd)

SUMMARY

The Fernhill South Wetlands Project No. 6405 (Project) consists of developing treatment wetlands on Clean Water Services (District) property at the Forest Grove Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF). Initial phases of the Project were designed and constructed in 2012 and in 2013. Additional treatment wetlands are planned for the area around the District’s WWTF and the area to the south where three large former sewage lagoons are located (South Wetlands).

The Project design team has drafted the basis of design for the South Wetlands, which includes emergent treatment wetlands for temperature reduction and an open water area. In addition to water quality benefits, the Project provides significant enhancement of wildlife habitat, and includes public amenities such as trails through the treatment wetlands to provide recreational and educational opportunities.

Construction of the South Wetlands is intended to be in two phases over the next two years (2014 and 2015). The majority of the work consists of specialized earthwork that will require dewatering, conditioning of the soil, and creation of microtopography that will be advantageous for growing wetland plants.

On January 21, 2014 the Board of Directors (Board) by Minute Order No. 14-4 authorized the District to use a Request for Proposals (RFP) to procure the services of a Construction Manager

(continued)

REQUESTED ACTION

Award the Construction Manager General Contractor contract to construct the Fernhill South Wetlands Project No. 6405 to C&M Excavation and Utilities, LLC.

Agenda Item No. 2.c.

Date: 03/18/14

5757

AWARD CONTRACT TO CONSTRUCT THE FERNHILL SOUTH WETLANDS PROJECT NO. 6405 TO C&M EXCAVATION AND UTILITIES, LLC 03/18/14

General Contractor (CMGC). In the first phase of the RFP, District determined whether proposers met the minimum qualifications for the Project. In the second phase, District reviewed the Construction Phase Cost and Cost Factor Proposals to determine which proposers submitted the lowest overall cost using certain assumed information provided by District. The RFP was advertised and five proposals were received, all of which met the minimum qualification requirements for the Project. District received Construction Phase Cost and Cost Factor Proposals from all five proposers. The proposers submitting the three lowest anticipated contract amounts using the assumed information are:

1. C&M Excavation and Utilities, LLC (C&M) 2. Coffman Excavation Inc. 3. Kerr Contractors, Inc.

District recommends awarding the CMGC Contract to C&M.

District will pay C&M based on two phases of work. In the preconstruction services phase, C&M will assist District and its engineers in finalizing the plans for the Project and District will pay Contractor on a time and expense basis up to an initial Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) amount of $20,000. In the construction services phase, any work not being self-performed by C&M will be bid out by C&M and awarded on a low bid basis. Prior to beginning construction, District and C&M will negotiate and enter into an Amendment to the Contract setting the final GMP that will include all costs for construction. District anticipates the final GMP for the construction phase of the Project will be between $4,000,000 and $5,000,000. District will bring the Amendment setting the final GMP to the Board for approval after negotiations are completed for the construction phase.

5858

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent (CPO All)

Agenda Title: ADOPT RESOLUTION AND ORDER APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO CLEAN WATER SERVICES' PURCHASING RULES

Presented by: Bill Gaffi, General Manager (gpl)

SUMMARY Clean Water Services' (District) Board of Directors (Board) previously adopted District’s current Purchasing Rules on July 24, 2012 by Resolution and Order No. 12-8 (Purchasing Rules). The District has opted out of the Attorney General's Model Public Contracting Rules (Model Rules) and maintains its own Purchasing Rules. The District is required to review the revisions to the Model Rules and determine whether it should modify its Purchasing Rules to comply with statutory changes. The Model Rules have been revised to reflect changes made by legislation from the 2013 legislative session and the Oregon Attorney General’s Office. Some of the changes to the Model Rules went into effect January 1, 2014. The District has reviewed the revisions to the Model Rules and the statutes and determined that some revisions to District’s Purchasing Rules would make procurement of goods and services more efficient and cost effective. The District also made various housekeeping changes. A summary of the proposed changes by Division is on the next page: (continued)

Attachment: Resolution and Order Adopting Revised Purchasing Rules

REQUESTED ACTION

Adopt the attached Resolution and Order approving amended Clean Water Services’ Purchasing Rules contained in Exhibit A to the Resolution and Order effective March 18, 2014. (A copy of the amended Purchasing Rules (Exhibit A) is available at the Clerk’s desk.)

Agenda Item No. 2.d.

Date: 03/18/14

5959

http://www.co.washington.or.us/BOC/Meetings/upload/CD-CWS-Purchasing-Rules-03-18-14.pdf

ADOPT RESOLUTION AND ORDER APPROVING AMENDED CLEAN WATER SERVICES' PURCHASING RULES 03/18/14 PAGE 2 Proposed changes by Division are as follows: Division 10 In 10-100, extended the duration a public contract may go for from three to five years. This change makes District’s Purchasing Rules consistent with Washington County’s. Division 15 In 15-010(1), change the threshold for small procurements from $5,000 to $10,000 incorporating the change made by the Oregon Legislature to ORS 279B.065. In 15-020(1), change the minimum threshold for intermediate procurements from $5,000 to $10,000 incorporating the change made by the Oregon Legislature to ORS 279B.070. Amend 15-060, Sole Source Procurements, to include the category of “Personal Services” to the categories of types of contracts that can be awarded by sole source method if the appropriate written findings are made. Division 20 In 20-010.1(c), change the threshold for when Goods and Services contracts are exempt from a Competitive Process from $5,000 to $10,000 in conjunction with the changes made in Division 15. In 20-110 and 20-120, increase the dollar amount for which competitive Quotes are required from $5,000 to $10,000 to incorporate the changes made in Division 15.

6060

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

BEFORE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CLEAN WATER SERVICES

In the Matter of Adopting Amended Clean Water Services' Purchasing Rules for District Procurements effective March 18, 2014.

) ) )

RESOLUTION AND ORDER

NO.

This matter came before the Board of Directors (Board) of Clean Water Services

(District) at its regular meeting of March 18, 2014; and

It appearing to the Board that it is the local contract review board for the District

pursuant to ORS 279A.060; and

It appearing to the Board that the Oregon Legislature during its 2013 session

revised and amended several provisions of the Oregon Public Contracting Code

contained in Chapter 279B, regarding the public contracting rules of procedure for all

public contracting agencies; and

It appearing to the Board that under ORS 279A.065 the District must follow the

Attorney General's Model Public Contracting Rules (Model Rules) unless the District

opts out of the Model Rules and adopts its own rules; and

It appearing to the Board that under ORS 279A.065(5)(a), the District opted out

of the Model Rules and adopted its own Purchasing Rules on February 22, 2005 by

Resolution and Order No. 05-7 and adopted amendments to its Purchasing Rules on May

23, 2006 by Resolution and Order Nos. 06-16 and 06-17, on January 8, 2008 by

Resolution and Order No. 08-2, on December 15, 2009 by Resolution and Order No. 09-

122, on December 20, 2011 by Resolution and Order No. 11-14 and on July 24, 2012 by

Resolution and Order No. 12-8; and

It appearing to the Board that under ORS 279A.065(5)(b) whenever the Attorney

General modifies the Model Rules, the District is to review the Model Rules and modify

its Purchasing Rules to ensure compliance with statutory changes; and

Page 1 of 2 – RESOLUTION AND ORDER CLEAN WATER SERVICES 2550 S.W. Hillsboro Highway Hillsboro, Oregon 97123-9379

Telephone (503) 681-3600 Fax (503) 681-3603

6161

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

It appearing that the District has reviewed the modified Model Rules and statutory

changes and prepared an amended version of the District’s Purchasing Rules attached

hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein for its procurement process based on the

changes enacted by the 2013 legislative session for adoption by District's Board; and

It appearing to the Board that the District's proposed Purchasing Rules will be

consistent with the policy of maintaining competition in public contracting; now,

therefore, it is

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Board does hereby adopt the revised

District Purchasing Rules set forth in Exhibit “A” for its public contracting effective

March 18, 2014; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the District's General Counsel shall have the

authority to renumber, reorganize, correct clerical errors and prepare and publish a

codified version of District's Purchasing Rules.


CLEAN WATER SERVICES

By its Board of Directors ________________________________ Chairman ________________________________ Recording Secretary

Page 2 of 2 – RESOLUTION AND ORDER CLEAN WATER SERVICES 2550 S.W. Hillsboro Highway Hillsboro, Oregon 97123-9379

Telephone (503) 681-3600 Fax (503) 681-3603

6262

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent

Agenda Title: AWARD CONTRACT FOR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS CONSULTING SERVICES TO VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES, INC.

Presented by: Bill Gaffi, General Manager (mj)

SUMMARY

Clean Water Services (District) is seeking a governmental affairs consultant to represent District on water resource management issues before the Congress of the United States, the Executive Branch, and other agencies of the U.S. Government, with the aim of ensuring that legislative and congressional actions are consistent with the views and interests of the District. The consultant will work with District and the Tualatin Project Repayment Contractors to secure the federal legislation necessary to modify the Bureau of Reclamation’s Scoggins Dam/Hagg Lake to secure the region’s primary water source and meet future water needs. The consultant will also represent the District before the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other federal agencies as directed. The District issued Request for Proposals on January 31, 2014. District received five proposals by the due date of February 14, 2014. A scoring summary is listed below. The proposals were evaluated based on the following criteria: relevant experience, project understanding, references, Oregon Connection, and compensation. The top three proposers and their scores are below:

1. Van Scoyoc Associates, Inc. 256 2. Capital Strategies 231 3. VH Strategies/Gephardt 229

The contract term runs through March 30, 2017, with an option to renew for two additional one-year terms. REQUESTED ACTION

Award Contract to provide federal government affairs consulting services to Van Scoyoc Associates, Inc., the highest scoring proposer, with a fixed fee of $7,000 per month and a total not to exceed of $250,000 for the three year contract term, with two additional one-year options at the same rate.

Agenda Item No. 2.e.

Date: 03/18/14

6363


6464

AGENDA

WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category: Consent – LUT/Maintenance Local Improvement District (CPO 6) Agenda Title: APPROVE ESTABLISHMENT OF A ROAD MAINTENANCE

LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (MLID) FOR BLANTON GARDENS

Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation SUMMARY:

The Board, by Resolution and Order No. 87-108, required that as a condition of development approval, a road Maintenance Local Improvement District (MLID) be formed with the final platting of any subdivisions initiated after May 19, 1987. A feasibility report was prepared for this MLID that establishes a base annual assessment of $650.43 or $24.09 per lot with a maximum annual assessment of $1300.86 or $48.18 per lot. However, with the passage of the Urban Road Maintenance District (URMD) in 1994, these charges will not be assessed. As required by Resolution and Order No. 87-108, MLIDs and their assessments are established for administrative purposes with assessments only initiated should the URMD expire.

A petition and waiver of the right to remonstrate (oppose) the formation of an MLID has been received for the following subdivision, in accordance with Resolution and Order 87-108. Proposed assessments are as follows:

Maximum Annual Assessment

No. Lots Per Lot Total

BLANTON GARDENS 27 $48.18 $1300.86

As the Board is aware, MLIDs and their assessments will continue to be established for administrative purposes only. There will be no assessments during the life of the Urban Road Maintenance District unless otherwise ordered by the Board.

Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order 2. Assessment and Vicinity Map-Exhibit A 3. Petition-Exhibit B 4. Waiver-Exhibit C 5. Feasibility Report-Exhibit D 6. Assessment Roll-Exhibit E

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Approve the attached Resolution and Order initiating and establishing the MLID, approving the feasibility report, and imposing, but not levying, a maximum annual assessment. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDATION:I concur with the requested action.

Agenda Item No. 2.f.

Date: 03/18/14

6565

Page 1 – RESOLUTION AND ORDER

WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNSEL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON In the Matter of Receiving a Petition, Approving ) a Feasibility Report, Establishing a Road ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER Maintenance Local Improvement District (MLID) ) and Authorizing the Proposed Work, Imposing a ) NO Maximum Annual Assessment, Receiving an ) Assessment Roll for, but not Limited to, ) Maintenance and Repair of Local Public Streets ) Serving BLANTON GARDENS subdivision. )

This matter having come before the Board at its meeting of March 18, 2014: and

It appearing to the Board that a petition, a waiver of the right to remonstrate (oppose)

the formation of a road Maintenance Local Improvement District (MLID), together with the

proposed work and assessment of costs, a feasibility report, and an assessment roll for an MLID

for, but not limited to, the maintenance and repair of local public streets serving BLANTON

GARDENS subdivision have been filed as set forth in the Washington County Code (WCC)

Chapter 3.20; and

It appearing to the Board that the location of the proposed MLID is shown on the

Assessment Map, attached hereto and marked Exhibit A; and

It appearing to the Board that 100% of the property owner(s) signed said petition,

attached hereto and marked Exhibit B, as shown on the affidavit on file; and

It appearing to the Board that a waiver of the right to notice, hearing, and remonstrance

(opposition) regarding the formation of the MLID together with the proposed work and

assessment of costs was signed by 100% of the property owner(s) within the proposed MLID at

the time of MLID formation, and that this waiver was recorded and runs with the land such that

all present and subsequent owners are on notice and bound thereby; and

155 N. FIRST AVE, SUITE 340 HILLSBORO, OR 97124

PHONE (503) 846-8747 - FAX (503) 846-8636 6666



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

It appearing to the Board that the feasibility report, attached hereto and marked Exhibit

D, confirms the feasibility of the petitioned for work, to wit: to, among other functions, maintain

and repair local public streets serving BLANTON GARDENS subdivision; and it appearing that

such report should be approved as submitted and adopted; and

It appearing to the Board that a program of, but not limited to, maintenance and repair

of the local public streets is necessary and that a maximum annual assessment of $48.18 per lot

should be imposed as the amount considered the maximum necessary for the annual work

thereof; and

It appearing to the Board that, pursuant to WCC Section 3.20.160 the proposed

assessment roll, attached hereto and marked Exhibit E, has been filed with the Board; and

It appearing to the Board that all property owners received notification of the time and

place that the Board would consider establishment of the said MLID and impositioned maximum

annual assessments, as shown on the notification letter on file; and

It appearing to the Board that it is appropriate to establish the MLID, in conformance

with WCC Chapter 3.20; now, therefore, it is hereby

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the petition is hereby received and that the

feasibility report is hereby approved, accepted and adopted; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the proposed MLID as described in the feasibility

report is hereby established; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the maximum annual assessment for all functions

proposed in this MLID shall be $48.18 for each lot that the assessment roll described in Exhibit

E is approved and the assessment imposed but not levied; and it is further


PHONE (503) 846-8747 - FAX (503) 846-8636 6767

6868

6969

7070

7171

7272

7373

7474

7575

7676

AGENDA

WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category: Consent – LUT/Maintenance Local Improvement District (CPO 7) Agenda Title: APPROVE ESTABLISHMENT OF A ROAD MAINTENANCE

LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (MLID) FOR NORTH BETHANY CREEK


The Board, by Resolution and Order No. 87-108, required that as a condition of development approval, a road Maintenance Local Improvement District (MLID) be formed with the final platting of any subdivisions initiated after May 19, 1987. A feasibility report was prepared for this MLID that establishes a base annual assessment of $3724.00 or $46.55 per lot with a maximum annual assessment of $7448.00 or $93.10 per lot. However, with the passage of the Urban Road Maintenance District (URMD) in 1994, these charges will not be assessed. As required by Resolution and Order No. 87-108, MLIDs and their assessments are established for administrative purposes with assessments only initiated should the URMD expire.

A petition and waiver of the right to remonstrate (oppose) the formation of an MLID has been received for the following subdivision, in accordance with Resolution and Order 87-108. Proposed assessments are as follows:

Maximum Annual Assessment

No. Lots Per Lot Total

NORTH BETHANY CREEK 80 $93.10 $7448.00

As the Board is aware, MLIDs and their assessments will continue to be established for administrative purposes only. There will be no assessments during the life of the Urban Road Maintenance District unless otherwise ordered by the Board.

Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order 2. Assessment and Vicinity Map-Exhibit A 3. Petition-Exhibit B 4. Waiver-Exhibit C 5. Feasibility Report-Exhibit D 6. Assessment Roll-Exhibit E

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Approve the attached Resolution and Order initiating and establishing the MLID, approving the feasibility report, and imposing, but not levying, a maximum annual assessment. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDATION:I concur with the requested action.

Agenda Item No. 2.g.

Date: 03/18/14

7777



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON In the Matter of Receiving a Petition, Approving ) a Feasibility Report, Establishing a Road ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER Maintenance Local Improvement District (MLID) ) and Authorizing the Proposed Work, Imposing a ) NO Maximum Annual Assessment, Receiving an ) Assessment Roll for, but not Limited to, ) Maintenance and Repair of Local Public Streets ) Serving NORTH BETHANY CREEK subdivision. )

This matter having come before the Board at its meeting of March 18, 2014: and

It appearing to the Board that a petition, a waiver of the right to remonstrate (oppose)

the formation of a road Maintenance Local Improvement District (MLID), together with the

proposed work and assessment of costs, a feasibility report, and an assessment roll for an MLID

for, but not limited to, the maintenance and repair of local public streets serving NORTH

BETHANY CREEK subdivision have been filed as set forth in the Washington County Code

(WCC) Chapter 3.20; and

It appearing to the Board that the location of the proposed MLID is shown on the

Assessment Map, attached hereto and marked Exhibit A; and

It appearing to the Board that 100% of the property owner(s) signed said petition,

attached hereto and marked Exhibit B, as shown on the affidavit on file; and

It appearing to the Board that a waiver of the right to notice, hearing, and remonstrance

(opposition) regarding the formation of the MLID together with the proposed work and

assessment of costs was signed by 100% of the property owner(s) within the proposed MLID at

the time of MLID formation, and that this waiver was recorded and runs with the land such that

all present and subsequent owners are on notice and bound thereby; and


PHONE (503) 846-8747 - FAX (503) 846-8636 7878



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

It appearing to the Board that the feasibility report, attached hereto and marked Exhibit

D, confirms the feasibility of the petitioned for work, to wit: to, among other functions, maintain

and repair local public streets serving NORTH BETHANY CREEK subdivision; and it

appearing that such report should be approved as submitted and adopted; and

It appearing to the Board that a program of, but not limited to, maintenance and repair

of the local public streets is necessary and that a maximum annual assessment of $93.10 per lot

should be imposed as the amount considered the maximum necessary for the annual work

thereof; and

It appearing to the Board that, pursuant to WCC Section 3.20.160 the proposed

assessment roll, attached hereto and marked Exhibit E, has been filed with the Board; and

It appearing to the Board that all property owners received notification of the time and

place that the Board would consider establishment of the said MLID and impositioned maximum

annual assessments, as shown on the notification letter on file; and

It appearing to the Board that it is appropriate to establish the MLID, in conformance

with WCC Chapter 3.20; now, therefore, it is hereby

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the petition is hereby received and that the

feasibility report is hereby approved, accepted and adopted; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the proposed MLID as described in the feasibility

report is hereby established; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the maximum annual assessment for all functions

proposed in this MLID shall be $93.10 for each lot that the assessment roll described in Exhibit

E is approved and the assessment imposed but not levied; and it is further


PHONE (503) 846-8747 - FAX (503) 846-8636 7979


WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNSEL 155 N. FIRST AVE, SUITE 340

HILLSBORO, OR 97124 PHONE (503) 846-8747 - FAX (503) 846-8636

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Board may levy annual assessments within the

maximum at such point in the future as it deems necessary.

Dated this 18th day of March 2014.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON ____________________________________ Chairman ____________________________________ Recording Secretary

8080

8181

8282

8383

8484

8585

8686

8787

8888

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent-Land Use and Transportation (CPO 8 & 9) Agenda Title: APPROVE DECLARATION OF NECESSITY AND PROTECTIVE

RENT PAYMENTS FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION FOR THE NW BROOKWOOD PARKWAY-NW MEEK-NE SHUTE ROAD PROJECT

Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation SUMMARY: Brookwood Parkway is a heavily used north/south arterial roadway that connects multi-modal commuters and truck traffic between Highway 26 and Tualatin Valley Highway (OR 8). The section of Brookwood Parkway between Meek Road and Shute Road carries approximately 28,000 vehicles a day. In order to meet the rapidly increasing commercial and industrial development in the area, Brookwood Parkway between Meek and Shute will be widened to three lanes in each direction. Additional improvements include bicycle and pedestrian facilities on both sides of the roadway, a new storm drainage system, utility upgrades, traffic signal modifications and street lighting. Some sections of the center median will also require reconstruction. (continued) Attachments: 1. Resolution & Order 2. Exhibits “A-1” & “A-2” 3. Vicinity Map 4. Typical 7-lane Cross Section

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Approve the attached Resolution and Order authorizing the staff to acquire the necessary right-of-way and protective rent payments for the NW Brookwood-NW Meek-NE Shute Road project.

s:\restricted\row\100202 brookwood pkwy (meek - shute)\agenda\dec nec. agenda.doc COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR’S RECOMMENDATION:I concur with the requested action.

Agenda Item No. 2.h.

Date: 03/18/14

8989

APPROVE DECLARATION OF NECESSITY AND PROTECTIVE RENT PAYMENTS FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION FOR THE NW BROOKWOOD PARKWAY-NW MEEK-NE SHUTE ROAD PROJECT BCC 03/18/14 In order to construct the improvements as designed, additional right-of-way and ancillary easements may be required. Right-of-Way acquisition for the project will follow Oregon State Department of Transportation guidelines and policies adopted by the Board. There may be opportunities to acquire right-of-way for the project, which may require protective rent payments. Accordingly, the Board is requested to approve protective rent payments for this project as necessary, which has been done on other similar projects. A Resolution and Order has been prepared for the Board, which would allow the County to acquire the right-of-way and easements by condemnation, if necessary. This project is being funded through the State of Oregon's Jobs and Transportation Act (JTA) program and City of Hillsboro Transportation Development Tax (TDT) funds. The estimated total cost for the project is $11.2 Million Construction of the road project is expected to begin June 2015 with anticipated completion June 2016.

9090

9191

9292

9393

9494

9595

9696

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent – Land Use & Transportation (CPO 5) Agenda Title: VACATE A PORTION OF A PERMANENT DRAINAGE

EASEMENT AND AN INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT DESCRIBED IN PARCEL VI OF DEED DOCUMENT NO. 90048906, VACATION 499

Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation SUMMARY: A petition was received by the Board to vacate a portion of a permanent drainage easement and an ingress and egress easement described in parcel VI of Deed Document No. 90048906. Said portion lying northeasterly of the northerly right-of-way of SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road and being situated in the northwest One-quarter of Section 27, T2S, R1W, W.M., Washington County, Oregon, as described and shown in the attached Vacation Report. The vacation petition was signed by 100% of the abutting property owners. The storm lines have been removed from the proposed vacation area and have been re-located in a new easement granted to the City of Tualatin and recorded as Deed Document No. 2011-081613. Staff has reviewed this request and has determined that the easements proposed to be vacated are not used by the public and are not necessary for future public use. The proposed vacation is in the public interest. There will not be any adverse impacts to the public or on the abutting properties. A Resolution and Order has been prepared granting the requested vacation and, when executed, it will complete Washington County’s portion of the vacation proceedings. This easement is in the city limits of Tualatin. Pursuant to ORS 368.361(3), the City, by resolution or order, must concur in the findings of the county governing body to complete the vacation proceedings. Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order

2. Vacation Report with legal description and Map (Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “B”)

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Vacate the permanent drainage easement and ingress and egress easement described in the attached vacation report, and request that the City Council of the City of Tualatin resolve or order concurrence with this vacation pursuant to ORS 368.361(3).



Agenda Item No. 2.i.

Date: 03/18/14

9797



In the Matter of the Vacation of a portion of a ) Permanent drainage easement and an ingress ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER And egress easement described in parcel VI of ) Deed Document No. 90048906, and being in the ) NO. Northwest One-quarter of Section 27, T2S, R1W,) VACATION NO. 499 W.M., Washington County, Oregon. )

The above-entitled matter having come on regularly before the Board at its meeting March 18, 2014; and

It appearing to the Board that a petition has been filed to vacate a portion of a permanent drainage easement and an ingress and egress easement described in parcel VI of Deed Document No. 90048906. Said portion lying northeasterly of the northerly right-of-way of SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road and being situated in the northwest One-quarter of Section 27, T2S, R1W, W.M., Washington County, Oregon, and being described and shown in the attached Vacation Report. The petition was signed by owners of 100% of the property to be vacated and by the owners of 100% of the abutting properties, pursuant to ORS 368.351; and

It appearing to the Board that said petition did describe the easements proposed to be vacated, the names of the parties to be particularly affected thereby, and set forth the particular circumstances of the case; and

It appearing to the Board that said easements proposed to be vacated may be under the jurisdiction of Washington County and entirely within the corporate limits of the City of Tualatin, Oregon as described in ORS 368.361(3); and

It appearing to the Board that said easements, proposed to be vacated, are no longer needed for the use of the public; and

It appearing to the Board that the County Road Official did examine the area proposed to be vacated and hereby submits to the Board the Vacation Report attached hereto, and by this reference made a part hereof, in accordance with ORS 368.351(1); it is therefore

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the easements more particularly described in the attached Vacation Report are hereby vacated as it is in the public interest. This vacation shall become final upon the formal concurrence of the City of Tualatin by either resolution or order pursuant to ORS 368.361(3); and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County Surveyor of Washington County, Oregon, be and hereby is authorized and directed to mark the vacated easements on the plats and records of Washington County Oregon; and it is further

9898

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County Surveyor of Washington County, Oregon, is hereby authorized and directed to have this order of vacation and the resolution or order of the City of Tualatin recorded in the records of Washington County, Oregon, and cause copies of these orders to be filed with the Director of Assessment and Taxation and the County Surveyor’s office in accordance with ORS 368.356(3).

Dated this 18th day of March, 2014.


Chairperson

Recording Secretary Approved as to form Cortney D. Duke-Driessen Assistant County Counsel Date: Page 2 – R&O No. Vacation No. 499

9999

DEPARTMENT OF LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION REPORT ON VACATION NO. 499

March 18, 2014

VACATION OF A PORTION OF A PERMANENT DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND AN INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT DESCRIBED IN PARCEL VI OF DEED DOCUMENT NO. 90048906 A request for vacation proceedings has been received by the staff for the Board of County Commissioners to vacate a portion of a permanent drainage easement and an ingress and egress easement described in parcel VI of Deed Document No. 90048906. Said portion lying northeasterly of the northerly right-of-way of SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road and being situated in the northwest One-quarter of Section 27, T2S, R1W, W.M., Washington County, Oregon. Said portions of said easements are described in the attached Exhibit “A” and shown on the attached Exhibit “B”. The owners of the property abutting the portion of the road to be vacated are: 2S1 27BD, TL 1900 Powin Pacific Properties, LLC An Oregon limited liability company 13432 Rogers Rd. Lake Oswego, OR 97035 CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF ROAD VACATION REQUESTS 1) Conformance with the County’s Comprehensive Plan

The easements proposed to be vacated are no longer in use. The storm lines have been removed from the proposed vacation area and have been re-located in a new easement granted to the City of Tualatin and recorded as Deed Document No. 2011-081613.

2) Use of the Right-of-Way or Easements The storm facilities and associated easements have been re-located in a new easement granted to the City of Tualatin. Therefore, they are no longer necessary.

3) Impact of Utilities and Emergency Services Utility providers and Emergency Services are not affected by this proposed vacation.

100100

4) Limits of Vacation and Evaluation of “public road” Status

The easements proposed to be vacated are not needed for public use. They are within the city limits of Tualatin and, pursuant to ORS 368.361(3), the city must concur with this vacation proceeding for it to become finalized.

The limits of the easements proposed to be vacated are logical and justifiable, and the vacation of these easements will not have any adverse impacts on the abutting property.

Based on the above statements, it is recommended that the Board of Commissioners grant the vacation of the easements proposed herein, as it is in the public interest. _____________________ Gary A. Stockhoff, P.E. Washington County Engineer

101101

102102

103103


104104

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent – Land Use & Transportation (CPO 1 & 7) Agenda Title: APPROVE METRO-COUNTY INTERGOVERNMENTAL

AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION EXCISE TAX GRANT TO FUND THE CONCEPT PLANNING OF AREA 93


The Area 93 concept planning will result in the development of an urban concept plan for Area 93 (Bonny Slope West). The concept planning effort will include the identification of proposed transportation improvements, land use designations, and significant natural resources. A link to information about the Area 93 concept planning is provided on the county web page at: http://www.co.washington.or.us/area93 Metro awarded the county $122,605 in CET grant funds to support the concept planning of Area 93. As part of the Transfer Plan Agreement for Area 93, Multnomah County agreed to allow Metro to transfer to Washington County the rights to the remaining balance of $82,500 in CET funding that had been granted to Multnomah County during the first round of CET grants in 2006. As outlined in the draft intergovernmental agreement (IGA), Metro has agreed to transfer the rights to that remaining balance of $82,500 in CET funding to Washington County. As outlined in the draft IGA, CET grant funds will be disbursed at five pre-determined milestones. The first disbursement of $20,511 is deliverable upon execution of this IGA, with four additional disbursements to follow at key milestones as prescribed in the CET grant application. A copy of the draft IGA is available for review electronically and at the Clerk’s desk. Attachment: Area 93 Map Clerk’s Desk Item: Draft IGA

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Approve and authorize the Chair to sign the Intergovernmental Agreement between Washington County and Metro for a Construction Excise Tax grant to fund the concept planning of Area 93.



Agenda Item No. 2.j.

Date: 03/18/14

105105

http://www.co.washington.or.us/area93

http://www.co.washington.or.us/BOC/Meetings/upload/CD-LUT-Area-93-Metro-IGA-03-28-14.pdf

106106

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent – Health and Human Services Agenda Title: APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH HEALTH SHARE OF OREGON

FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF HEALTHY HOMES ASTHMA INTERVENTION HOME VISIT PROGRAM

Presented by: Rod Branyan, Director SUMMARY: Health Share of Oregon is the recipient of an Oregon Health Authority Health Transformation grant to improve population health. Health Share of Oregon has proposed an agreement with Washington County to expand the Healthy Homes Asthma Intervention Home Visit program. This program will consist of a community health worker who works with a nurse case manager to provide in-home assessments, asthma education and the provision of supplies such as vacuum cleaners, green cleaning materials, or mattress covers. Staff will also collaborate with multiple housing partners who work to facilitate structural repairs or relocation and evaluation that drives quality practice change and defined outcomes. The target population shall be children up to eighteen years old with asthma or persistent wheezing for a total of 50 enrolled families to receive home visits and associated interventions designed by the team. The Department requests your Board approve an agreement with Health Share of Oregon in the amount of $195,154 to expand the Healthy Homes Asthma Intervention Home Visit program through June 30, 2015.

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Approve an agreement with Health Share of Oregon in the amount of $195,154 to expand the Healthy Homes Asthma Intervention Home Visit program through June 30, 2015.


Agenda Item No. 2.k.

Date: 03/18/14

107107


108108

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent – Health and Human Services Agenda Title: APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH TNT FISCAL

INTERMEDIARY SERVICES TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR PERSONS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

Presented by: Rod Branyan, Director SUMMARY: An Intergovernmental Agreement with the State of Oregon provides funding for services to developmentally disabled individuals. The State has increased funding designated for TNT Fiscal Intermediary Services in the amount of $620,400 to provide payment of support bills on behalf of consumers with development disabilities. On July 2, 2013, your Board awarded the original contract with TNT Fiscal Intermediary Services in the amount of $1,716,276 through June 30, 2014 (MO #13-193). This amendment in the amount of $620,400 exceeds 20 percent of the original contract amount. The Department requests your Board approve an amendment to the 2013-2014 contract with TNT Fiscal Intermediary Services in the amount of $620,400 through June 30, 2014. The new contract total is $2,336,675.

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:

Approve an amendment to the 2013-2014 contract with TNT Fiscal Intermediary Services in the amount of $620,400 through June 30, 2014.


Agenda Item No. 2.l.

Date: 03/18/14

109109


110110

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent – Health and Human Services Agenda Title: APPROVE CONTRACT WITH BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS

COLUMBIA NORTHWEST FOR MENTOR SERVICES Presented by: Rod Branyan, Director SUMMARY: The Department requests your Board’s approval to contract with Big Brothers Big Sisters Columbia Northwest (BBBS) for Mentor services through December 31, 2016 for a maximum contract amount of $300,000 for three years. Funding for this contract will be provided through Coordinated Care Organization agreement with Health Share of Oregon, which supports the provision of mental health services. In 2011 BBBS was awarded a contract based on a competitive RFP process (2011.075P). This request would extend the contract with BBBS through December 31st, 2016 based on the Contractor satisfactorily meeting the terms of the initial contract. The length of the contract is contingent on the availability of funds, the continued need for the services, and contract performance and compliance. This contract will provide volunteer Mentors (Big Brothers or Big Sisters) to youth in the Intensive Service Array and Wraparound programs who lack committed, supporting relationships with adults. Funds available in any given year may change due to state Legislative action, funding priorities, or other system changes and will be finalized during the annual contract renewal process.

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Approve a contract with Big Brothers Big Sisters Columbia Northwest (BBBS) for Mentor services through December 31, 2016 for a maximum contract amount of $300,000 for three years.


Agenda Item No. 2.m.

Date: 03/18/14

111111


112112

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent – Support Services Agenda Title: ACCEPT BID/AWARD CONTRACT FOR PAINTING SERVICES

(2014.010B) Presented by: Martin Granum – Facilities and Parks Services Manager SUMMARY: This agenda item requests that your Board accept the bid and award a contract for painting services to Williamsen & Bleid in the amount of $245,000 through March 15, 2019. The required legal advertisement and Invitation to Bid was issued January 24, 2014. A total of five (5) bids were received by the closing time and date of 11:00 am, February 19, 2014. See page 2 for the Bid Summary. The scope of work for this contract includes both interior and exterior painting of various County-owned structures. The County will provide all paint for the contractor. The contract amount is based on an estimate of painting jobs required over the five year contract term. County facilities, interior and exterior, are on a regular painting schedule, designed to assure that all facilities maintain a satisfactory appearance and minimize weathering and water infiltration. In addition, this contract allows the County to promptly respond to painting needs associated with new construction, remodeling and emergency response. (continued)

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Accept the bid from Williamsen & Bleid for painting services and award a co ntract with a no t to exceed expenditure of $245,000 through March 15, 2019.



Agenda Item No. 2.n.

Date: 03/18/14

113113

ACCEPT BID/AWARD CONTRACT FOR PAINTING SERVICES (2014.010B) BCC 03/18/14

BID SUMMARY

BIDDER HOURLY RATE(70 POINTS)

PROJECT COST (30 POINTS)

TOTAL POINTS (100 Points)

Boles Brothers Inc $1,773.50 $14,668.00 87

Bulldog Design $1,680.00 $62,224.00 67

Painting Oregon $3,114.45 $39,332.00 47

Reid Werks, Inc. $10,800.00 $190,000.00 12

Williamsen & Bleid* $1,440.00 $18,950.00 93

*Awarded Bidder The bidders responded with the ho urly rates fo r pain ters, which was multiplied b y 30 hours. They then gave a price to paint the o utside of the Walnut Street Building, which was identif ied as the P roject Cost. A percen tage of points were given for each category and the h ighest total points determined the winning bid.

114114

AGENDA

WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category: Consent – Support Services Agenda Title: APPROVE RESOLUTION AND ORDER AMENDING THE

FISCAL YEAR 2013-14 PAY PLAN TO ADD A NEW CLASSIFICATION TITLED HOUSING RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM MANAGER AND ESTABLISHING ITS PAY RANGE AND TO ADJUST THE SALARY RANGE OF THE DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CLASSIFICATION

Presented by: Stephanie Reitmajer, Human Resources Manager SUMMARY: The purpose of this agenda is to request that your Board approve the attached Resolution and Order amending the fiscal year 2013-14 pay plan, establishing a compensation level for a new classification titled Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager, and adjusting the salary range of the Deputy County Administrator classification, to be effective on March 29, 2014. The Division of Human Resources staff regularly conducts classification and compensation studies to maintain salary structure. The work includes reviews to add or update classifications and to make certain the compensation associated with the classification is in line with the organizational structure, assigned job tasks, and internal pay relationships. Pursuant to Section 6 of the Civil Service Act (Washington County Code 2.32 appendix 1), the Human Resources Manager shall perform such duties as the Civil Service Commission may prescribe. On January 24, 2003 the Civil Service Commission delegated authority to classify all positions in the civil service and amend, add to, consolidate or abolish such classification as appropriate, to the Human Resources Manager. (continued) Attachment: Resolution and Order

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Approve the attached resolution and order amending the FY2013-14 Pay Plan adding a new classification titled Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager and establishing its pay range, and adjusting the salary range of the Deputy County Administrator classification, with an effective date of March 29, 2014.



Agenda Item No. 2.o.

Date: 03/18/14

115115

APPROVE THE RESOLUTION AND ORDER AMENDING THE FY2013-14 PAY PLAN ADDING A NEW CLASSIFICATION TITLED HOUSING RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM MANAGER AND ESTABLISHING ITS PAY RANGE AND ADJUSTING THE SALARY RANGE OF THE DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CLASSIFICATION BCC 03/18/14 Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager – (new classification) Staff recommends the addition of the new classification of Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager and a corresponding salary range to the FY2013-14 Pay Plan. The incumbent in this classification will have broad program and staff management responsibilities for staff that perform technical and administrative tasks that support the Housing Choice Voucher Program in the Department of Housing Services. The classification that has been used for this position did not articulate the specific duties required of the incumbent in the management of the staff and the program. The new classification more appropriately defines the work required of the incumbent that is assigned to this classification. The recommend salary range for the new classification is R47M ($5,745.37 - $6,980.13 monthly). The proposed salary range reflects the job duties and market factors for related positions within Washington County. An existing vacant position within the Department of Housing Services will be reallocated to the new classification. The new classification and reallocation will result in no additional fiscal impact for the remainder of FY 2013-2014, as funding will come from existing appropriations already approved in the Department of Housing Services budget. Deputy County Administrator – (salary range adjustment) Human Resources recently reviewed the compensation for the Deputy County Administrator classification. Based on the findings, and in order to make certain the compensation associated with the classification is in line with organizational structure, assigned job tasks, and internal pay relationships, staff recommends the pay range be adjusted from the current range of R53M to range R57M ($7,350.66 to $8,937.01 per month). The requested action will enhance the ability of the County Administrative Office to recruit and retain qualified staff to perform the complex duties associated with positions within the classification, including the performance of analytical and administrative services related to policy, operating procedures, organizational structure, budget requests and other financial matters in departments assigned to the position. The proposed salary range represents an increase of approximately 10% in the classification pay range. The adjustment will result in no additional fiscal impact for the remainder of FY 2013-2014, as funding will come from existing appropriations already approved in the County Administrative Office budget.

116116

Page 1 - RESOLUTION AND ORDER (Amending the FY 2013-2014 Pay Plan) WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNSEL

155 N. FIRST AVE, SUITE 340 ~ MS #24 HILLSBORO, OR 97124

PHONE (503) 846-8747 - FAX (503) 846-8636

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22



In the Matter of Amending the Washington County FY 2013-2014 Pay Plan to Add the Classification of Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager and to Establish its Salary Range and Adjusting the Salary Range for the Classification of Deputy County Administrator.

) ) ) ) ) ) )

RESOLUTION AND ORDER

No.

This matter having come before the Washington County Board of County Commissioners

at its regular meeting of March 18, 2014; and

It appearing to the Board that Washington County Code Chapter 2.32. Appendix I, known as the

Washington County Civil Service Act, directs that the Board shall fix the compensation of all civil service

positions in the county; and

It appearing to the Board that Washington County Charter, Chapter VII, at Section 72, directs that

compensation for all positions be established as provided by the Board; and

It appearing to the Board that the Washington County Pay Plan sets forth all classifications in the

County, including compensation for such classifications; and

It appearing to the Board that the FY 2013-2014 Pay Plan was adopted by the Board at its regular

meeting on June 25, 2013; and

It appearing to the Board that amendments to the Washington County FY2013-2014 Pay Plan are

necessary to add a new classification to be known as Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager at a

salary range of R047M ($5,745.37 to $6,980.13 per month) effective March 29, 2014; and

It appearing to the Board that amendments to the Washington County FY2013-2014 Pay Plan are

necessary to adjust the salary range for the classification of Deputy County Administrator from R53M

($6,661.18 to $8,093.83 per month) to R57M ($7,350.66 to $8,937.01) effective March 29, 2014; now,

therefore, it is

117117

Page 2 - RESOLUTION AND ORDER (Amending the FY 2013-2014 Pay Plan) WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNSEL

155 N. FIRST AVE, SUITE 340 ~ MS #24 HILLSBORO, OR 97124

PHONE (503) 846-8747 - FAX (503) 846-8636

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Washington County Pay Plan is hereby amended to add a

new classification entitled Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager effective March 29, 2014; and

further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Washington County FY 2013-2014 Pay Plan is amended to

add the salary range for the classification of Housing Rental Assistance Program Manager at R047M

($5,745.37 to $6,980.13 per month) effective March 29, 2014; and further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Washington County Pay Plan is hereby amended to adjust

the salary range for the classification of Deputy County Administrator from R53M ($6,661.18 to $8,093.83

per month) to R57M ($7,350.66 to $8,937.01) effective March 29, 2014; and further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the Washington County Administrator shall take all steps

necessary to implement this Resolution and Order.



CHAIR RECORDING SECRETARY

118118

AGENDA


Agenda Category: Consent – Support Services (CPO All) Agenda Title: ACCEPT PROPOSAL AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR

FINANCIAL AUDIT SERVICES (2014.002P) Presented by: Mary Gruss, Chief Finance Officer SUMMARY: The contract with the current financial audit firm, Talbot Korvola & Warwick LLP, expired in February 2014. The County issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for financial audit services on February 12, 2014. The selection process included the evaluation of proposals by staff and one Audit Committee member (the Evaluation Committee). The Audit Committee, which is charged with the responsibility of providing an opinion on the professional acceptability of the recommended firm, received and supports the Evaluation Committee’s recommendation. The following five firms submitted proposals:

Talbot Korvola & Warwick LLP Moss Adams LLP Eide Bailly LLP James Marta & Company LLP Clifton Larson Allen LLP.

The proposals were scored in accordance with the criteria established in the RFP, which included qualifications of the firm, expertise of staff, approach to scope of work and cost. After a thorough evaluation of the criteria, the Evaluation Committee recommends the firm of Talbot Korvola & Warwick LLP as best suited to perform the required financial services for the County. Attachment: Scoring Summary DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Accept the proposal from Talbot Korvola & Warwick LLP to perform financial audit services for the County and its component units and award a five year contract through December 31, 2018 in the amount of $1,032,420.



Agenda Item No. 2.p.

Date: 03/18/14

119119

ACCEPT PROPOSAL AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR FINANCIAL AUDIT SERVICES (2014.002P) BCC 03/18/14

Scoring Summary

PROPOSER EVALUATION SCORE* Clifton Larson Allen LLP 417 Eide Bailly LLP 431 James Marta & Company LLP 291 Moss Adams LLP 439 Talbot, Korvola & Warwick LLP 485 *Out of a possible 500 points.

120120

AGENDA

WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category: Consent – Support Services (CPO 11) Agenda Title: AUTHORIZE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS

1S536AB02100 TO DAVID H. PATTERSON Presented by: Martin Granum, Facilities & Parks Manager SUMMARY: Washington County owns property described as 1S536AB, Tax Lot 2100, located on SW Date Street, Gaston, Oregon. This property was received through the tax foreclosure process in 2014 for nonpayment of back taxes. The property is approximately .25 acre in size and is located across the street from the former Cherry Grove School property. Your Board previously approved the sale of the former Cherry Grove School to David Patterson. The above-referenced parcel of land is adjacent to the former school property and is used as the leach field for the old Cherry Grove School. Given the existing use of the property, staff recommends the parcel be sold to the adjacent property owner. Oregon Revised Statute 275.225 authorizes the sale of property valued at less than $15,000, and deemed unbuildable, to be sold at private sale and requires that advertisement of the sale be made in a newspaper of general circulation. This parcel meets the requirements of this statute. The real market value (RMV) of the parcel as shown by the Department of Assessment & Taxation is $5,400. David H. Patterson has offered to purchase the above-described property for $1,080. This parcel of land is of no value other than to the owner of the former Cherry Grove School. Staff recommends your Board declare the property surplus to the County’s need and authorize the sale of the County-owned property as identified above to David H. Patterson for the amount offered. Advertisement for the sale of the property, as required in ORS 275.225, has been completed. Attachment: Vicinity Map

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Authorize sale of County-owned property described as 1S536AB02100 to David H. Patterson in the amount of $1,080 and authorize the Board Chair to execute the deed.



Agenda Item No. 2.q.

Date: 03/18/14

121121

1S536AB02100

February 25, 2014

O

Geonet0 0.015 0.03 0.045 0.060.0075

Miles

1:2,400Disclaim er:Th e in fo rm atio n o n th is m ap w as derived fro m digital databases o n W ash in gto n Co un ty’s Geo graph ic In fo rm atio n System (GIS). Care was taken in th e creatio n o f th is m ap, h o w ever, W ash in gto n Co un tycan n o t accept an y respo n sibility fo r erro rs, o m issio n s, o r po sitio n al accuracy. Th erefo re th ere are n o w arran ties w h ich acco m pan y th is pro duct. No tificatio n o f an y erro rs w ill be appreciated.

W ash in gto n Co un ty155 No rth First Aven ueHillsbo ro , OR 97124ph (503) 846-8611

122122

AGENDA

WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category: Consent – Support Services (CPO 5) Agenda Title: AUTHORIZE PRIVATE SALE OF COUNTY-OWNED REAL

PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS 2S129BC, TAX LOTS 90960, 91070, 91130, 91260, 91270, 91280, 91290, 91300, 91310, AND 91320 TO HUNTER’S RIDGE HOME OWNER’S ASSOCIATION

Presented by: Martin Granum, Facilities &Parks Manager SUMMARY: Washington County owns the following parcels of land described as 2S129BC, Tax Lots 90960, 91070, 91130, 91260, 91270, 91280, 91290, 91300, 91310, and 91320, located at 20510 SW Borchers Drive, Sherwood, Oregon. These parcels of land were received by Washington County through the tax foreclosure process in 2014. The subject parcels consist of nine parking spaces and one storage unit located in the Hunters Ridge Condominium parking lot, which are also a common element of the Hunter’s Ridge Home Owner’s Association. Oregon Revised Statute 275.225 authorizes the sale of property valued at less than $15,000, and deemed unbuildable, to be sold at private sale and requires that advertisement of the sale be made in a newspaper of general circulation. The real market value (RMV) for each of the nine parking spaces as shown by the Department of Assessment & Taxation is $4,350 per tax lot; and the storage unit RMV is shown at $2,560. The Hunter’s Ridge Home Owner’s Association has offered to purchase the above-described tax lots for $1,000 for each parking space and $500 for the storage unit; for a total purchase amount of $9,500. These tax lots are of no value other than to the home owner’s association. Staff recommends your Board declare the property surplus to the County’s need and authorize the sale of the County-owned property to the Hunter’s Ridge Home Owner’s as identified above for the amount offered. Advertisement for the sale of the property, as required in ORS 275.225, has been made. Attachment: Vicinity Map

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Declare parcels 2S129BC, Tax Lots 90960, 91070, 91130, 91260, 91270, 91280, 91290, 91300, 91310, and 91320 as surplus to the County’s needs, authorize sale of the properties to the Hunter’s Ridge Home Owner’s Association in the amount of $9,500, and authorize the Board Chair to execute the deeds.



Agenda Item No. 2.r.

Date: 03/18/14

123123

2S129BC91070

February 25, 2014

O

Geonet0 0.015 0.03 0.045 0.060.0075

Miles

1:2,400Disclaim er:Th e in fo rm atio n o n th is m ap w as derived fro m digital databases o n W ash in gto n Co un ty’s Geo graph ic In fo rm atio n System (GIS). Care was taken in th e creatio n o f th is m ap, h o w ever, W ash in gto n Co un tycan n o t accept an y respo n sibility fo r erro rs, o m issio n s, o r po sitio n al accuracy. Th erefo re th ere are n o w arran ties w h ich acco m pan y th is pro duct. No tificatio n o f an y erro rs w ill be appreciated.

W ash in gto n Co un ty155 No rth First Aven ueHillsbo ro , OR 97124ph (503) 846-8611

124124

AGENDA


Agenda Category:

Consent – Service District for Lighting No. 1 A County Service District (CPO 6)

Agenda Title: FORM ASSESSMENT AREA, AUTHORIZE MAXIMUM ANNUAL

ASSESSMENT, AND IMPOSE A FIRST YEAR ASSESSMENT FOR BLANTON GARDENS

Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation SUMMARY: A petition has been received requesting the installation of street lighting service for BLANTON GARDENS. The petitioners have presented a signed agreement waiving a public hearing and their right to remonstrate against the improvements. A signed continuing request for street lighting service has also been provided. Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order

2. Petition for Street Lighting Service – Exhibit A 3. Street Lighting Proposal – Exhibit B 4. Waiver and Continuing Request – Exhibit C 5. Assessment Area Map and Vicinity Map – Exhibit D

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Accept the petition(s), form an assessment area within the Service District for Lighting, and authorize maximum annual assessment and impose a first year assessment.


Agenda Item No. 2.s.

Date: 03/18/14

125125




1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

IN THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT

FOR LIGHTING (No. SDL-1) In the Matter of Creating an Assessment Area, ) Ordering Installation, Operation and Maintenance ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER of Street Lighting Facilities; Establishing a ) Maximum Annual Assessment and Imposing a First ) NO. Year Assessment for BLANTON GARDENS. )

This matter having come before the Board of Directors of the Service District For

Lighting No.1, a county service district, at its meeting of March 18, 2014; and

It appearing to the Board that 100% of the property owners in the proposed assessment

area described in Exhibit A, known as the BLANTON GARDENS development, have requested

by petition that their property be included in an assessment area for purposes of installing,

operating and maintaining street lighting facilities and that said facilities be financed by special

assessments on their property; and

It appearing to the Board that 100% of the property owners voluntarily have waived their

right to notice, hearing remonstrance and referendum, and consent to assessment as set forth

herein; and

It appearing to the Board that the street lighting facilities described in Exhibit B, will be a

special benefit to the properties and that the assessment method and amounts represent a

reasonably fair and equitable manner for apportioning costs in relation to benefit; now, therefore

it is

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the assessment area described in Exhibit C hereby is

established, and, that the facilities described in Exhibit B, shall be installed, operated and

maintained as described therein; and it is further

126126




1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the assessment method, maximum annual assessment

amount and first year assessments shown in Exhibit B hereby are adopted, levied and imposed.

Said first assessment shall be placed on the tax rolls and collected in the same manner as ad

valorem property taxes as provided by law if not otherwise paid by July 1, and, it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that, for purposes of Section 11b, Article XI of the

Oregon Constitution, said annual assessment amounts hereby are classified as “taxes levied or

imposed for the purpose of funding government operations” subject to the limit of $5 per $1000

of real market value; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the maximum annual assessment may be increased

after newspaper notice and public hearing to pass through direct cost increases for administration

and electricity as provided by Ordinance No. 3; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County Administrator, or his designee, shall take

steps to place matter of record and such other steps as are necessary to implement this Resolution

and Order.

DATED this 18th day of March 2014.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR

WASHINGTON COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT FOR LIGHTING (No. SDL-1) CHAIRMAN RECORDING SECRETARY

127127

128128

129129

130130

131131

132132

133133

134134

AGENDA


Agenda Category:


Agenda Title: FORM NORTH BETHANY SERVICE DISTRICT FOR

LIGHTING, CREATE ASSESSMENT AREA, AUTHORIZE MAXIMUM ANNUAL ASSESSMENT, AND IMPOSE A FIRST YEAR ASSESSMENT FOR NORTH BETHANY CREEK

Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation SUMMARY: Commercial development of the North Bethany Plan Area is proceeding with the first application submitted by NORTH BETHANY CREEK. Property owners will petition for inclusion into a service district for lighting (SDL). Pursuant to ORS chapter 451 and SDL Ordinance 1, an SDL may be created by resolution of the Board or petition of the property owners. A petition has been received requesting the installation of street lighting service for North Bethany Creek. The petitioners have presented a signed agreement waiving a public hearing and their right to remonstrate against the improvements. A signed continuing request for street lighting service has also been provided. Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order

2. Map of North Bethany Service District for Lighting – Exhibit A 3. Petition for Street Lighting Service – Exhibit B 4. Street Lighting Proposal – Exhibit C 5. Waiver and Continuing Request – Exhibit D 6. Assessment Area Map and Vicinity Map for North Bethany Creek – Exhibit E

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Create the North Bethany Service District for Lighting, accept the petition(s), form an assessment area within the North Bethany Creek Service District for Lighting, authorize maximum annual assessment, and impose a first year assessment.


Agenda Item No. 2.t.

Date: 03/18/14

135

PULLED

135

136

PULLED

136

137

PULLED

137

138

PULLED

138

139

PULLED

139

140

PULLED

140

141

PULLED

141

142

PULLED

142

143

PULLED

143

144

PULLED

144

145

PULLED

145


146146

AGENDA


Agenda Category:


Agenda Title: FORM ASSESSMENT AREA, AUTHORIZE MAXIMUM ANNUAL

ASSESSMENT, AND IMPOSE A FIRST YEAR ASSESSMENT FOR MONTESSORI SCHOOL

Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use & Transportation SUMMARY: A petition has been received requesting the installation of street lighting service for MONTESSORI SCHOOL. The petitioners have presented a signed agreement waiving a public hearing and their right to remonstrate against the improvements. A signed continuing request for street lighting service has also been provided. Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order

2. Petition for Street Lighting Service – Exhibit A 3. Street Lighting Proposal – Exhibit B 4. Waiver and Continuing Request – Exhibit C 5. Assessment Area Map and Vicinity Map – Exhibit D

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION:Accept the petition(s), form an assessment area within the Service District for Lighting, and authorize maximum annual assessment and impose a first year assessment.


Agenda Item No. 2.u.

Date: 03/18/14

147147




1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

IN THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT

FOR LIGHTING (No. SDL-1) In the Matter of Creating an Assessment Area, ) Ordering Installation, Operation and Maintenance ) RESOLUTION AND ORDER of Street Lighting Facilities; Establishing a ) Maximum Annual Assessment and Imposing a First ) NO. Year Assessment for MONTESSORI SCHOOL. )

This matter having come before the Board of Directors of the Service District For

Lighting No.1, a county service district, at its meeting of March 18, 2014; and

It appearing to the Board that 100% of the property owners in the proposed assessment

area described in Exhibit A, known as the MONTESSORI SCHOOL development, have

requested by petition that their property be included in an assessment area for purposes of

installing, operating and maintaining street lighting facilities and that said facilities be financed

by special assessments on their property; and

It appearing to the Board that 100% of the property owners voluntarily have waived their

right to notice, hearing remonstrance and referendum, and consent to assessment as set forth

herein; and

It appearing to the Board that the street lighting facilities described in Exhibit B, will be a

special benefit to the properties and that the assessment method and amounts represent a

reasonably fair and equitable manner for apportioning costs in relation to benefit; now, therefore

it is

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the assessment area described in Exhibit C hereby is

established, and, that the facilities described in Exhibit B, shall be installed, operated and

maintained as described therein; and it is further

148148




1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the assessment method, maximum annual assessment

amount and first year assessments shown in Exhibit B hereby are adopted, levied and imposed.

Said first assessment shall be placed on the tax rolls and collected in the same manner as ad

valorem property taxes as provided by law if not otherwise paid by July 1, and, it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that, for purposes of Section 11b, Article XI of the

Oregon Constitution, said annual assessment amounts hereby are classified as “taxes levied or

imposed for the purpose of funding government operations” subject to the limit of $5 per $1000

of real market value; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the maximum annual assessment may be increased

after newspaper notice and public hearing to pass through direct cost increases for administration

and electricity as provided by Ordinance No. 3; and it is further

RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County Administrator, or his designee, shall take

steps to place matter of record and such other steps as are necessary to implement this Resolution

and Order.

DATED this 18th day of March 2014.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR

WASHINGTON COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT FOR LIGHTING (No. SDL-1) CHAIRMAN RECORDING SECRETARY

149149

150150

151151

152152

153153

154154

155155

156156