COVID-19: City Hall and Lausmann Annex are closed until further notice.
Please note: Municipal Court is conducting business by phone. Please call 541-774-2040.
Click here for more information.


Agenda & Minutes

When available, the full agenda packet may be viewed as a PDF file by clicking the "Attachments" button and selecting the file you want to view.

Agendas are posted until the meeting date takes place.  Minutes are posted once they have been approved.

Mayor & Council (View All)

City Council Study Session Agenda & Minutes

Thursday, January 12, 2017

January 12, 2017

12 Noon
City Hall, Medford Room
411 West 8th Street, Medford, Oregon

                   1.  Real Property Disposal Procedures
                   2.  Transportation System Plan Update

January 12, 2017

12 Noon
City Hall, Medford Room
411 West 8th Street, Medford, Oregon

The Medford City Council Study Session was called to order at 12:00 p.m. in the Medford Room of Medford City Hall on the above date with the following members and staff present:
Mayor Gary Wheeler; Councilmembers Kay Brooks, Tim D’Alessandro, Dick Gordon, Tim Jackle, Kevin Stine, Kim Wallan and Michael Zarosinski
City Manager Brian Sjothun; City Attorney Lori Cooper; Deputy City Recorder Winnie Shepard; Public Works Director Cory Crebbin, City Engineer Alex Georgevitch
Mayor Wheeler and Councilmember Bearnson were absent.
Surplus Real Property  
City Manager Brian Sjothun spoke regarding the City’s surplus property: 
  • There is no formal process for handling surplus property; past procedures have been situational based
  • City Manager has authority over real property leases, sales, etc.
  • Property is deemed surplus if it can’t be developed, is not needed for future use, or exceeds the required amount for a right-of-way
            Recommend Creating Property Classifications:
  • Substandard/Undeveloped – lots that cannot be developed
  • Standard/Undeveloped – could potentially be developed
  • Developed property – land with structures
  • Special Restricted property – land with agreed restrictions on the property
New Process:
  • Present list to Council every biennium with all properties, their category and provide sale recommendation
  • Sales of more than $100,000 would require Council approval
  • Council decides best use for facilities: sale or lease
    • Leases are fairly inexpensive ($1 per year) but they are usually required for maintenance and upkeep
    • Council determines whether to sell/lease at real market cost with proceeds returning to the departments which purchased the property or the general fund
City Attorney Lori Cooper spoke regarding the necessity of revising the Code language to document any new requirements for the public and future Councils. She noted Oregon law requires a public hearing before cities sell real property.  However, we could list multiple pieces of property in one hearing instead of scheduling a hearing for each piece.
Council Input: 
  • Recommend real estate appraisals before selling property, specific exceptions
    • Any exceptions to appraisal need should be included
    • Should lease/sell for fair market value, unless it is for the community’s benefit
    • All sales should go through a competitive process before making a decision
    • RFP process for higher-value properties
  • Determining Surplus
    • Requirements for development are outlined in the Code
    • Create an internal process to prevent selling of property needed in the future
    • Require departments to create a 20-year plan explaining proposed uses for each piece of property retained
      • Public Works and Parks have long-range plans
      • Fire and Police do not have long-range plans
      • Long-range planning should be included in the budget
    • Clarify the lot sizes to determine whether property is developable
Public Works Director Cory Crebbin stated small “remnant” pieces of property are typically offered to the abutting property owner, using the County Assessor’s property values as the asking price.  He noted the sale of these small lots eliminates any maintenance/upkeep expense.  
  • Most Standard Developed and Undeveloped classifications should require an RFP
  • All departments should indicate whether they are interested in the property before selling
  • Code should not include specifics; should be general with Council determining specifics on a case-by-case basis
  • Biennial report of the surplus property will be provided to Council during off years
Councilmember Zarosinski clarified:
  • Council supports the biennial identification; but should consider long-range needs
  • Standard properties would go through RFP process, reserving the right to retain
    • RFP process provides flexibility
    • One or two Councilmembers could be included with the scoring process
    • Possible exception for public service contracts and/or lease
Transportation System Plan (TSP)
Public Works Director Cory Crebbin provided a brief explanation of the TSP, noting that Council determines the level of service for the TSP.  Level of service (LOS) means the length of time a car waits at a light, stop sign or intersection. 
City Engineer Alex Georgevitch outlined the various aspects of the TSP:
  • Required element of the comprehensive plan
  • Blueprint for our transportation system over the next 20 years
  • Engineering projects are determined by the TSP
  • Used for budget, identifies funding, SDC rates and how streets are planned and built
  • Engineering attempts to obtain public involvement through committees and notices
  • TSP on our website at
  • Engineering creates alternatives to streets wider than 5 lanes
  • TSP scores LOS from A–F
    • 20 to 35 second wait is about C
    • 35 to 80 seconds is around E
    • Greater than 80 seconds is about an F
    • Peak hours vary per location and surroundings (residential/commercial, etc.)
    • LOS is measured during peak hours, but is based upon an average
    • LOS may be changed to Council determination
Still needed:
  • Determine financial need and funding through gas tax, SDC revenues or other sources
  • Determine the LOS standards, including multi-modal
  • East side has connectivity issues; creating local connections reduces the need for additional lanes
  • Additional study sessions
  • Completed safety analysis; federal government also provided safety information
  • Planning commission public hearing
After presentation, discussed the following:
  • A roundabout is always considered before a traffic signal is installed
  • Items should move through Joint Transportation faster
  • Until UGB is acknowledged by the LCD, there is no need to amend comprehensive plan
    • Should amend within a year of UGB expansion
    • TSP should be ready for Council approval around the same time
    • There should be no land development without reviewing TSP
  • Requested more communication to the Council regarding road projects
  • Citizens need information on street projects impacting their homes and increasing traffic
  • Requested an update on the Cedar Links/Springbrook intersection
  • Concerns about Columbus Avenue project as funds were received to begin
Mr. Crebbin clarified that a project report is updated on the City’s website every month. The Foothills Road project took priority over the Cedar Links/Springbrook intersection as there are time constraints on the funding to complete Foothills.  He explained the entire TSP is on our website and it indicates any proposed expansions. Councilmember Wallan requested Council notification when projects are postponed.
Mr. Sjothun stated a future study session is scheduled to discuss Public Work projects. In addition, the new community relations officer would help to provide more timely information to the Council and the public.
The meeting adjourned at 1:32 p.m.
Winnie Shepard
Deputy City Recorder

© 2021 City Of Medford  •  Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A


Share This Page

Back to Top