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 Meeting Agenda & Minutes

Minutes
Thursday, November 01, 2018

AGENDA
November 1, 2018

6:00 p.m.
Medford City Hall, Council Chambers
411 West 8th Street, Medford, Oregon

  
10.    Roll Call
 
20.    Recognitions, Community Group Reports
 
30.    Oral Requests and Communications from the Audience
         Comments will be limited to 4 minutes per individual, group or organization.  PLEASE SIGN IN.
 
40.    Public Hearings
Comments are limited to a total of 30 minutes for applicants and/or their representatives.  You may request a 5-minute rebuttal time.  Appellants and/or their representatives are limited to a total of 30 minutes and if the applicant is not the appellant they will also be allowed a total of 30 minutes.  All others will be limited to 4 minutes. PLEASE SIGN IN.
 
40.1     COUNCIL BILL 2018-123 A resolution adopting the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) pertaining to Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the 2017-18 program year.
 
         40.2     COUNCIL BILL 2018-124 An ordinance proclaiming annexation to the City of Medford of an approximate 1.65 acre parcel, including an adjacent right-of-way, located on the southeast corner of Table Rock Road and Biddle Road (4256 Table Rock Road), and concurrent zone change from County LI (Light Industrial) to City I-L (Light Industrial) and designated within the Limited Industrial Overlay District (I-00), and withdrawal of said property from Medford Rural Fire Protection District #2, effective pursuant to State Law. (A-18-083) Land Use, Quasi-Judicial
 
         40.3     COUNCIL BILL 2018-125 An ordinance approving a legislative amendment to the Environmental Element and the Conclusions, Goals, Policies, and Implementation Strategies of the Medford Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the 2017 Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan. (CP-18-063) Land Use, Legislative
 
         40.4     COUNCIL BILL 2018-126 An ordinance adopting a revised Transportation System Plan (2018-2038) and approving a legislative amendment to the Transportation Element, Public Facilities Element, and the Conclusions, Goals, Policies, and Implementation Strategies of the Medford Comprehensive Plan. (CPA-16-036) Land Use, Legislative
 
50.    Approval or Correction of the Minutes of the October 18, 2018 Regular Meeting
 
60.    Consent Calendar
         60.1     COUNCIL BILL 2018-127 An ordinance authorizing the execution of an agreement with the City of Medford and Medford Police Officers Association pertaining to salary, hours, fringe benefits, and other working conditions for July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021.
 
         60.2     COUNCIL BILL 2018-128 An ordinance authorizing cash payments to Hayden Homes LLC for Street System Development Charge credits in the amount of $291,512.08 for right-of-way dedication and street construction on Owen Drive completed as a condition of approval for Delta Estates Phase 2 & 3.
 
         60.3     COUNCIL BILL 2018-129 An ordinance authorizing the execution of an agreement granting Community Development Block Grant funds in the amount of $250,000.00 to Youth 71five Ministries for the acquisition and renovation of real property located at 11 Almond Street.
 
70.    Items Removed from Consent Calendar
 
80.    Ordinances and Resolutions
        
90.    Council Business
         90.1     Proclamations issued:
                        Extra Mile Day, November 1, 2018
                        Veterans’ Day – November 11, 2018
 
         90.2     Committee Reports and Communications
 
100.  City Manager and Staff Reports
         100.1   Further reports from City Manager
 
110.  Adjournment

MINUTES
November 1, 2018

6:00 p.m.
Medford City Hall, Council Chambers
411 West 8th Street, Medford, Oregon

The regular meeting of the Medford City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Medford City Hall Council Chambers on the above date with the following members and staff present:
 
Mayor Gary Wheeler; Councilmembers Clay Bearnson, Kay Brooks, Tim D’Alessandro, Dick Gordon, Tim Jackle, Kevin Stine, Kim Wallan, Michael Zarosinski
 
City Manager Brian Sjothun; Deputy City Manager Eric Zimmerman; City Attorney Lori Cooper; City Recorder Karen Spoonts
 
20.    Recognitions, Community Group Reports
 
30.    Oral Requests and Communications from the Audience
        
40.    Public Hearings
40.1     COUNCIL BILL 2018-123 A resolution adopting the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) pertaining to Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the 2017-18 program year.
 
  Principal Planner Angela Durant presented the staff report and staff objectives. An informal public participation was recently held. Councilmember Gordon noted the Housing and Community Development Commission did approve the report and recommended it to Council.
 
Public hearing opened.
No one spoke.
Public hearing closed.
 
Motion:  Approve the resolution.
Moved by:  Tim D’Alessandro                                            Seconded by:  Kay Brooks
Roll call:  Councilmembers unanimously approved.
Resolution #2018-123 was duly adopted.
 
Mayor Wheeler welcomed County Commissioner Bob Strosser in the audience.
 
         40.2     COUNCIL BILL 2018-124 An ordinance proclaiming annexation to the City of Medford of an approximate 1.65 acre parcel, including an adjacent right-of-way, located on the southeast corner of Table Rock Road and Biddle Road (4256 Table Rock Road), and concurrent zone change from County LI (Light Industrial) to City I-L (Light Industrial) and designated within the Limited Industrial Overlay District (I-00), and withdrawal of said property from Medford Rural Fire Protection District #2, effective pursuant to State Law. (A-18-083)
 
                     Planner III Dustin Severs presented the staff report and annexation criteria. Councilmember Zarosinski questioned the potential conflict with annexing property with a house currently being built on it. Mr. Severs stated the applicant can annex under these conditions, although they would not be able to add on to the home once annexed into the city.
 
Public hearing opened.
No one spoke.
Public hearing closed.
 
Motion:  Approve the ordinance.
Moved by:  Clay Bearnson                                                 Seconded by:  Tim D’Alessandro
Roll call:  Councilmembers unanimously approved.
Ordinance #2018-124 was duly adopted.
 
         40.3     COUNCIL BILL 2018-125 An ordinance approving a legislative amendment to the Environmental Element and the Conclusions, Goals, Policies, and Implementation Strategies of the Medford Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the 2017 Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan. (CP-18-063)
 
                     Principal Planner Carla Paladino presented the staff report and stated the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the Plan. The approved criteria were presented and Ms. Paladino explained how the proposed Plan is in compliance with these criteria. Possible text changes based on Council comments are: 1) page 108, potential earthquake damage 2) page 113, conclusion 10, severe weather, and 3) page 115, Policy 12-B(1) and Policy 12-C Building Code reference.
 
                     Councilmember Brooks questioned why language regarding climate change was removed; Ms. Paladino noted staff discussed and removed it, although Council can choose to change their recommendation.
 
Public hearing opened.
No one spoke.
Public hearing closed.
 
Motion:  Adopt the ordinance per the Council Report dated October 25, 2018, including all exhibits and with noted modifications to pages 108, 113, and 115: 1) potential earthquake damage 2) severe weather and 3) building code reference.
Moved by:  Michael Zarosinski                                           Seconded by:  Tim D’Alessandro
Councilmember Zarosinski noted much of this will be maintained in the Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan and he was okay with that, including the topic of earthquakes. Severe weather has to do with scenario planning. He did not believe that we have had dramatic weather events compared to other areas in the nation. The Building Code reference was referencing the old language. Councilmember Bearnson stated he would not support due to the removal of the severe weather language.
 
Amended Motion #1: Strike out Conclusion #10 on page 113 pertaining to climate changes.
Moved by:  Clay Bearnson                                                 Seconded by:  Kay Brooks
Councilmember Stine questioned will anything be done differently; Ms. Paladino noted it is a summary only and does not change how we do things. Councilmember Bearnson questioned if we could modify language to add climate change.
Amendment was withdrawn by Councilmember Bearnson.
 
Amended Motion #2: Amend the original motion to exclude page 113 and state that severe weather is becoming more common to all persons.
Moved by:  Kay Brooks                                                      Seconded by:  Clay Bearnson
Council continued to discuss the language and what weather this area has experienced.
Amended Motion #2 Roll call:  Councilmembers Bearnson, Brooks, D’Alessandro, Gordon, and Stine voting yes; Jackle, Wallan and Zarosinski voting no.
 
Main Motion Roll call:  Councilmembers unanimously approved.
Ordinance #2018-125 was duly adopted.
 
         40.4     COUNCIL BILL 2018-126 An ordinance adopting a revised Transportation System Plan (2018-2038) and approving a legislative amendment to the Transportation Element, Public Facilities Element, and the Conclusions, Goals, Policies, and Implementation Strategies of the Medford Comprehensive Plan. (CPA-16-036)
 
Planning Director Matt Brinkley presented the staff report. The proposal is to replace the Transportation Element with the revised Transportation System Plan (2018-2038), amend the Public Facilities Element, and amend the Goals, Policies and Implementation Strategies Element. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the TSP with funding Option #5 (Scenario #5). There were three sets of criteria that needed to be addressed; all have been addressed and have found to be satisfied. Council requested staff review the scenarios with the various committees. Tier 1 projects were identified assuming grants were received, although Columbus and Delta Waters projects will be improved on funding currently on hand. Possible changes with functional classifications would be Spring Street crossing (pedestrian/bike project only), re-classify Spring Street connection (Pierce to Foothill), Barnett connection to Cherry Lane, and re-classify Owen Drive. Siskiyou Velo concerns were addressed, noting that 1) the TSP proposes strategic investment and improvement of bicycle facilities through a range of options to build a safe, connected bicycle network 2) Medford is working with Jackson County and other communities within the region to develop a regional Active Transportation Plan 3) Medford is not solely responsible for meeting the MPO’s Alternative Measure targets, but nevertheless leads the MPO in many of those metrics, and 4) Deputy City Attorney Eric Mitton has reviewed Siskiyou Velo’s comments and has advised that the TSP does not “discriminate” against any class as defined in state and federal law. It was noted changes to South Stage description were based on comments received from ODOT; we will need an environmental process.
 
                     Council was asked to provide direction on the following options:
  • Option 1: Which funding scenario? The funding scenario chooses different projects.
  • Option 2: Spring Street crossing of Bear Creek and I-5; replace it with a pedestrian only crossing or eliminate the project entirely.
  • Option 3: Spring Street extension from Pierce to Foothill, leave it as a collector or remove it.
  • Option 4 – Arterial Ring, currently consists of McAndrews, Foothill, S. Stage, and Columbus; add a second ring by designating Owen as a minor arterial.
  • Option 5 – E. Barnett Road and Cherry Lane are currently designated as minor arterial, major and minor collectors; designate all segments as major arterial or other higher order street.
  • Option 6 – Eliminate local connections across airport property per exhibit “O”.
  • Option 7 – Modify any goals, objectives, or actions as Council sees fit.
 
Councilmember Stine questioned the default for park strips; P.W. Transportation Manager Karl McNair stated the default in new development is to include them. The legacy street standards do give us options. Councilmember Bearnson questioned financial impacts to Owen Drive if reclassified. P.W. Deputy Director Alex Georgevitch stated there would be no cost difference; only a minor increase in improvements and purchasing land.
 
Councilmember Wallan questioned if the options are in our packet; Mr. Brinkley stated they are not, as they are based on comments that came up at the last minute from Council members. Councilmember Wallan questioned if the Legal memo answered all legal sufficiency pertaining to state law and requirements. She also commented on not completely understanding where Council has discretion and where it doesn’t have discretion, and that is not just the City that will be held to mandatory standards, but developers as well. Councilmember Wallan is still not sure she has enough information to answer these questions. City Attorney Cooper noted this issue of mandatory vs. non-mandatory was discussed at Council Officers; the TSP is general guidance and the Code implements specific standards for specific land use applications. The existing TSP contains many “shall” statements, and we have implemented many of these actions over the years. Ms. Cooper discussed two court cases involving comprehensive plans and whether parts of these plans were mandatory standards and criteria or were general guidance. The bottom line is that courts have interpreted comprehensive plans to give cities a lot of discretion in how they use the plans, whether as general guidance or as a mandatory criteria. If the Council sees something in this TSP that it absolutely does not want to be mandatory, the Council should spell that out. If the Council does not want ANY of it to be mandatory, it can say that. These are policy decisions. If the Council has questions about specific goals or objectives or policies, we can talk about that.
 
Councilmember D’Alessandro questioned the Spring Street project over the freeway. Mr. Brinkley noted that goes back to the 2003 TSP. Public Works Director Cory Crebbin noted back in the 2003 TSP, that connection was needed to provide Level-of-Service (LOS) for other streets. It is not needed anymore. Councilmember D’Alessandro questioned Spring Street connection to Foothill. Mr. McNair stated the Spring Street connection to Foothill was not in the model and would not affect the LOS in the Plan. Councilmember Bearnson questioned whether concerns regarding greenhouse gas emissions were factored into the TSP. Mr. Brinkley noted there are not specific numerical standards; our MPO was one of the first in the state to conduct scenario planning regarding greenhouse gases and the outcome of the exercise was that we should convert our public fleets to use CNG which is produced at the Dry Creek landfill. That would have the single most significant impact on greenhouse gases in this region. Changing land uses, providing more bicycle facilities does not have nearly the impact that changing public fleets to CNG would. Councilmember Bearnson asked if the TSP can be augmented in the future if we get better information regarding greenhouse gases; Mr. Brinkley said yes, absolutely, we anticipate doing pedestrian and bicycle-specific plans in the future.
 
Councilmember Gordon questioned Option #5 and if the Fire Department is okay with two lanes for evacuation purposes on Cherry Lane. If there were an evacuation we may be able to convert two lanes going down the hill and a turn lane may provide additional assistance getting traffic down the hill. He also spoke of cones used in various cities to handle traffic at certain times of day. The section of road needs to be a major collector without the strip in the middle. Mr. Crebbin noted a motion could be made. Councilmember D’Alessandro questioned what the concern with the median is; Councilmember Gordon noted there are additional costs with arterial. Without a landscape median it could be used for one additional lane for emergencies. Fire Chief Brian Fish noted the problem with evacuations is people panic with an emergency and the Fire Department needs access up the hill. Fire has the ability of ingress/egress. As development grows we can shelter people that may not be able to get out. Mr. Fish noted if we can take over the middle portion of the street.
 
Councilmember Zarosinski questioned the streets going through the airport property; Mr. Crebbin noted Council approved leasing that land from the airport. He was unsure why those streets were added. Councilmember Brooks questioned the rundown of projects for various wards and if that is available; Ms. Paladino stated as we got more detailed things were not matching; staff didn’t want to send something that did not have a total dollar amount. Councilmember Gordon questioned if staff accounted for the 50 year MPO Plan; Mr. Brinkley noted we modeled for 20 years out as that is consistent with TSP plans. Councilmember Gordon disagreed as we interrupt neighborhoods by making them collector streets. At some time we need to look at an arterial street plan, at least as an overlay. The streets can’t carry the load. Mayor Wheeler noted we can have that discussion at some time.
 
**********
 
Mayor Wheeler called a recess at 7:38 p.m.; the meeting resumed at 7:51 p.m. with the same members present.
 
**********
 
Mr. Brinkley took a look at the MPO Plan and stated it is not a 50 year plan, only four years more than our TSP. Projecting out 50 years is a difficult thing to do. We might have a completely different transportation plan than we do now. Development has caused difficulty on the east side due to cul-de-sacs. We have grown up around those streets and would have to take aggressive action on the way of neighborhoods. When we improve legacy streets and build it out it has a huge impact on the surrounding neighborhood. It’s not easy and there will always be tradeoffs. This TSP gets us closer than the current TSP.
 
Public hearing opened.
  1. Gary Shaff requested the TSP be modified to reduce carbon emissions and encouraged Tier 1 projects.
  2. William Mansfield stated he was the one no vote on the Planning Commission and agreed with the bicycling community.
  3. Harlan Bittner, President of Siskiyou Velo, noted there are improvements on the TSP coming before Council but separated bike lanes are needed for all ages and abilities. Councilmember Stine questioned what we would change with our limited dollars. Mr. Bittner noted it is up to the Planning Commission to determine how to do that. Councilmember Wallan hoped he will stay involved with the City and described how two different bike communities wanted two different ideas on Foothill Road.
  4. Jeff Roberts urged Council to strength all ages and abilities within the TSP. He noted it is a quality of life issue as it is more enjoyable to ride bikes. It is a better way of spending public funds.
  5. Ann Smith noted they moved here as a primary option to ride bikes but expressed concern with her bike ride to and from work.
  6. Brian McLemore, CEO of Pacific Retirement Services, urged approval of the TSP. Many of their developments need to be done while the economy is good.
  7. Randy Jones, Mahar Homes, noted there are a lot of good ideas in this Plan that will work. They have been working with staff pertaining to fire safety for the east hills. The Leisure Service Plan has ideas too.He encouraged Council to stick with the Level 5 funding.
  8. Mike Montero, Montero Associates, supports adoption of the TSP and noted how Medford is strategic. He agreed with supporting Option 5.
  9. Jay Harland, agreed with the above three comments. Concurrency has been discussed and requested that be part of the conversation. He noted the Plan is a reasonable balance. He requested an amendment to the map on page 74 of the TSP, Exhibit 16. He thinks 55’ is a typo. He talked about the bike network options requested by Siskiyou Velo and how they can assist in developing. Councilmember D’Alessandro questioned his concern with concurrency; Mr. Harland spoke about an issue that was on the TSP in 2003 that was going to be worked on right away and was never done so. Concurrency is a narrow part of the TSP that has to do when the city facilities are adequate in relationship to new development putting trips on it.
  10. Alan Hubbard, MD, spoke about the obesity issue on the west coast. He requested Council embrace all ages and abilities.
Public hearing closed.
 
Councilmember Zarosinski questioned why three separate cross sections are presented; Mr. Brinkley noted that gives choices, if needed, such as acquiring right-of-way. It is Council’s decision.
 
Councilmember Jackle questioned Mr. Georgevitch on Ms. Cooper’s memo level on mandatory, permissive on City of Eugene and approval criteria. Mr. Georgevitch stated he had not seen her memo. Councilmember Jackle asked if we adopt the Eugene model is there a down side to Engineering’s requirements. Mr. Georgevitch noted this is the document that helps us write code. There is always leeway in crafting the code, such as Comprehensive Plan and Council goals and objectives. Modifications may need to be revised to the TSP as needed. He thinks it’s important that Planning weigh in on this as well. Assistant Planning Director Kelly Akin stated Planning relies heavily on the Land Development Code. Councilmember Jackle questioned how this ties in with the Oregon Transportation Plan. Mr. Georgevitch noted it is a code decision. We are going to do the fine tuning when we change the code and how it affects other parts of the code.
 
Motion:  Approve the ordinance authoring the Comprehensive Plan amendment as recommended by the Planning Commission with the following additions and modifications: 1) Passing a concurrency ordinance in accordance with the Transportation Planning Rule as it apples in Medford and added as an objective or goal 2) Add a clear qualifying statement that the TSP is a general guidance document and not criteria for specific land use decisions, 3) the Spring Street extension over I-5 and Bear Creek be considered as a pedestrian-only facility, 4) the residential lane right-of-way be modified to an appropriate width for that roadway section 5) Owen Drive be added as part of the arterial ring 6) that the local connections shown through the airport property/leased land be removed from the TSP  7) Cherry Lane from Hillcrest to Barnett Road be revised on the functional classification map as a major collector and 6) concur with Planning Commission decision regarding Funding Scenario #5.
Moved by:  Michael Zarosinski                                           Seconded by:  Tim D’Alessandro
Councilmember Zarosinski noted we have received hundreds of pages and the concept of the ability for all ages is throughout the entire TSP. We’ve done everything we can through our financial constraints. Councilmember D’Alessandro agreed and if we had more money we would see more changes as we are lacking right-of-way in many areas. Councilmember Wallan questioned if the motion addressed all seven items. Mr. Brinkley noted eliminating Spring Street between Pierce and Foothill was not in the motion. Councilmember Wallan thought we needed to address evacuation routes on the east side.
 
Amended Motion #1:  Eliminate Spring Street extension from Pierce Road to Foothill Road.
Moved by:  Kay Brooks                                                      Seconded by:  Dick Gordon
Councilmember Gordon expressed concern with putting more traffic on Spring Street. Councilmember Jackle thought if we don’t connect Spring Street the traffic would be coming down other streets. Councilmember Brooks noted there are connections with McAndrews and Foothill there. Mayor Wheeler noted he would leave it in even though Spring Street is underdeveloped as traffic on Lone Pine Road is difficult due to Lone Pine School.
Amended Motion #1 Roll call:  Councilmembers Brooks, Gordon, and Stine voting yes, Bearnson, D’Alessandro, Jackle, Wallan and Zarosinski voting no.
Motion failed.
 
Amended Motion #2: Include elimination of Spring Street pedestrian connection over Bear Creek and I-5.
Moved by:  Kay Brooks                                                      Seconded by:  Kim Wallan
Councilmember Brooks noted money for this could be better used elsewhere; Councilmember Wallan agreed.
Amended Motion #2 Roll call:  Councilmembers unanimously approved.
Motion carried and so ordered.
 
Amended Motion #3:  Include Cherry Lane as an emergency evacuation route and the elimination of curbed/landscaped median.
Moved by:  Kay Brooks                                                      Seconded by:  Tim D’Alessandro
Councilmember Zarosinski noted this just prevents obstructions in the median.
Amended Motion #3 Roll call:  Councilmembers unanimously approved.
Motion carried and so ordered.
 
Motion:  Direct staff to prepare a final ordinance to be brought back to Council on November 15, 2018.
Moved by:  Michael Zarosinski                                           Seconded by:  Dick Gordon
Motion Roll call:  Councilmembers unanimously approved.
Motion carried and so ordered.
 
Mayor Wheeler noted this is a living document that would meet the needs of the city. The changes will be hard to predict. It will continually change and improve. He urged a yes vote and stated we can revisit the issues. Councilmember Brooks will be voting no as West Medford was not addressed as much. There could be more funding allocated for West Medford, such as bicycle facilities. Councilmember Jackle does not think there are ways to improve bicycle facilities but pedestrian mode has been addressed.  Councilmember Bearnson stated he will be voting no. Councilmember Brooks noted there are no mixed use paths, and alleyways can be used as mixed use paths.
 
Main motion roll call:  Councilmembers D’Alessandro, Jackle, Stine, Wallan, and Zarosinski voting yes; Bearnson, Brooks and Gordon voting no.
Ordinance #2018-126 was duly adopted.
 
Councilmember Gordon requested red line only when it comes back to Council; not the entire exhibits.
 
50.    Approval or Correction of the Minutes of the October 18, 2018 Regular Meeting
         There being no changes, the minutes were approved as presented.
 
60.    Consent Calendar
         60.1     COUNCIL BILL 2018-127 An ordinance authorizing the execution of an agreement with the City of Medford and Medford Police Officers Association pertaining to salary, hours, fringe benefits, and other working conditions for July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021.
 
         60.3     COUNCIL BILL 2018-129 An ordinance authorizing the execution of an agreement granting Community Development Block Grant funds in the amount of $250,000.00 to Youth 71five Ministries for the acquisition and renovation of real property located at 11 Almond Street.
 
Motion:  Adopt consent calendar.
Moved by:  Kevin Stine                                                      Seconded by:  Kim Wallan
Roll call:  Councilmembers Bearnson, D’Alessandro, Gordon, Jackle, Stine, Wallan, and Zarosinski voting yes; Brooks voting no.
Motion carried and so ordered.  Council Bills approved: #2018-127 and 2018-129.
 
70.    Items Removed from Consent Calendar
         Councilmember Gordon requested 60.2 be removed.
 
         60.2     COUNCIL BILL 2018-128 An ordinance authorizing cash payments to Hayden Homes LLC for Street System Development Charge credits in the amount of $291,512.08 for right-of-way dedication and street construction on Owen Drive completed as a condition of approval for Delta Estates Phase 2 & 3.
 
                     Councilmember Gordon questioned completing a segment of Owen Drive. Mr. Georgevitch noted it was removed from the plan at the Planning Commission. He stated Columbus extension would be the next project staff will work on. Councilmember Gordon questioned how far out can they build as part of concurrency. Mr. Georgevitch noted there is no code requirement for LOS at this location, so there would be no limitation on buildout of the development due to a local street issue. Mr. Crebbin noted the Budget Committee would need to put it into the budget, and if approved, design work could be started.
 
Motion:  Approve the ordinance.
Moved by:  Dick Gordon                                                    Seconded by:  Kevin Stine
Roll call:  Councilmembers unanimously approved.
Ordinance #2018-128 was duly adopted.
 
80.    Ordinances and Resolutions
        
90.    Council Business
         90.1     Proclamations issued:
                        Extra Mile Day, November 1, 2018
                        Veterans’ Day – November 11, 2018
 
         90.2     Committee Reports and Communications
                     a.   Councilmember Zarosinski questioned who would not be in attendance for the November 8 Study Session; Councilmembers Bearnson, Brooks, D’Alessandro, and Gordon stated they will not be attending.
 
                     b.   The General Election is Tuesday, November 6. With the potential of a Ward 4 Council vacancy, Council will need to direct staff to initiate the procedure for filling the vacancy.
 
Motion:  Direct staff to initiate the procedure for filling the potential Ward 4 vacancy per MMC 2.085.
Moved by:  Michael Zarosinski                                           Seconded by:  Tim D’Alessandro
Roll call:  Councilmembers unanimously approved.
Motion carried and so ordered.
 
100.  City Manager and Staff Reports
         100.1   Further reports from City Manager
                     a.   Parks, Recreation and Facilities Director Rich Rosenthal stated that on January 1, 2019, the Parks SDC fees will increase by 6.7%. The cost of developing has escalated dramatically within the last few years. There are parks to be developed and we will need every dollar. Mr. Sjothun noted the ordinance does not require this to be approved by Council but we still wanted to bring this before Council.
                    
110.  Adjournment
There being no further business, this Council meeting adjourned at 9:37 p.m.
 
The proceedings of the City Council meeting were recorded and are filed in the City Recorder’s Office. The complete agenda of this meeting is filed in the City Recorder’s Office.
 
 
Karen M. Spoonts, MMC
City Recorder

 

© 2019 City Of Medford  •  Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A

Quicklinks

Select Language

Share This Page

Back to Top