The meeting was called to order by Mayor Cheryl A. Young at 7:32 p.m. Mayor Young delivered the invocation and led the flag salute.

Mayor Cheryl A. Young

Councilor Marian Calnon

Councilor Gary Hudson

Councilor Bob Schmor

COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT:

Councilor Bill Guy

ALSO PRESENT:

Josh Harper, Police Sergeant

Micah Olson, Public Works Superintendent

Leahnette Rivers, City Administrator/Recorder

ATTORNEY PRESENT:

Jim Horn, City Attorney

A quorum was present and due notice had been published.

AGENDA ITEM 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.

AGENDA ITEM 3 CITIZEN INPUT:

Frank and Joan Cisneros: Frank and Joan Cisneros of Columbia City presented the Council with a letter dated May 6, 2004, providing an outline of events that occurred related to a claim another citizen made about them, the City's involvement in the matter, and the City's refusal to release the name of the complainant to them. Joan Cisneros said they have lived in Columbia City for eleven years, and asked the City Council for resolution to a problem with the way in which the City handled false allegations made against them. She said the allegation had to do with a false statement that they were disposing of asbestos shingles in their garbage can, which they had never done. She said it is their belief that the City had no jurisdiction over this matter, and that this kind of infraction would have been handled by the DEQ. She said Ms. Rivers took the complaint from the complainant, called it into Hudson Garbage Service, and retained the anonymity of the person who made the complaint.

Mrs. Cisneros said she and her husband were gone for several months, and they had canceled their garbage service and paid their City water bill. She said when they returned from their trip they were called by Hudson Garbage Service, who said the City had called them and said that possibly we had been putting asbestos shingling in our garbage can. She said I told them we had not been home for two or three months, and we have not been doing that. She said Hudson's indicated they had also received a call from the DEQ about this.

Mrs. Cisneros said through several conversations with Ms. Rivers they found out what happened, and they contacted someone who is a mediator as they were hoping to just be able to talk this over and find out who had made the complaint. She said it is obvious to them that the person who made the complaint did not do so with the intent to save the environment because they were out of town and had no garbage service at the time. She said it had to be an attempt to cause them some difficulties, get them into trouble, or somehow slur our name in the community.

Mrs. Cisneros said when they talked to Ms. Rivers about this, she said since it wasn't true, no harm had been done. Mrs. Cisneros said that actually a lot of harm had been done, as they had invested a lot of time into this, and so had the City employees and attorneys. She said they tried to get mediation going, but the City said they were not interested in that. She said as a result they had to take the next step, which was to obtain legal advice. She said this has been time consuming and should never have happened to them.

Mrs. Cisneros said all that they want is the name of the party who complained against them, and we promise we will not sue them or retaliate. She said it is prudent to provide them with the name of the complainant for several reasons. First of all, things can stop right there. She said they will not badger this person, but obviously this person has some kind of ill will towards them, and if we are ever to get it straightened out we need to know whom the person is. Thirdly, she said the City is supposed to have open records, and by that I mean that the records are open to citizens and other people. She said Ms. Rivers made the comment to them that she was going to respect this person's anonymity. She said since Ms. Rivers did not have any jurisdiction over this, for her to grant anonymity is not within her rights. Also, the person that complained needs to realize that there are consequences for calling in and saying things about your neighbors. She said they were not home to defend themselves, and they don't know who heard the conversation, and they don't know how many people in town think we were putting this in our trashcan. She said we are owed an apology and, we are owed the knowledge of the person's name.

Referring to Ms. Rivers' comment that no harm was done, Mrs. Cisneros said she now looks at every neighbor that goes by thinks, "Are you the one? Or are you the one? Or are you the one?" She said every time she goes out in front of her house she is looking around to see who is watching me water, and it is very, very uncomfortable and it is very easy to make allegations about people, especially when they are gone. She said this has to be a lie because we weren't home, and we don't have any asbestos shingles.

Mrs. Cisneros said they are asking the Council to end this right now so it does not have to go any further. She said they have been struggling with this for just about a month now, and they are being forced to take legal action if we can't obtain the name of the party. She said there will be no retribution on their part, they just want to sit down with this person and find out what they had imagined we had done to them or how they can remedy this so they don't have to worry about it all of the time.

Mrs. Cisneros asked the Council to study this and analyze this, and overturn the decision that's come from the City Attorney's office about keeping the name of the party anonymous. She asked the Council to read the information they provided and think about what was said, and think about the repercussions that have come from the citizen making untrue allegations about another citizen when that citizen was not even home. She said this is a dangerous precedent. She said they really want the name of the person that complained, and that is all that they want. She said they are hoping for an early decision on this so they can move on with their lives, and get back to feeling safe and secure in their home.

Frank Cisneros said this was all done behind their back when they were not in town. He said they were not notified and nothing in the mail waiting for them when they returned. He said out of the clear blue sky they received a call from Hudson Garbage Service, and then when they tried to investigate it, we got the run around with people not returning phone calls. He said in the beginning there was a poor judgment call. He said people make mistakes, and let's undo the mistake. He asked the Council to reconsider this, and release the name of the person. He said they will not sue the person, and they won't sue the City for their part in this, but they want to be able to look at their neighbors and know that not all of them could be the culprit. He said he did a very embarrassing thing when he asked his very good neighbor, Parnell, if he had reported this. He said he does not want to be asking everyone that he meets in the Post Office or the store if they were the one that did this. He said it should be an open record, and they should be able to face their accuser. He said if this does not involve the City as far as authority and jurisdiction, the City should have just referred this person to the DEQ. He said the City would not have taken a collect call for this report, they would have referred them to the proper authority. He said the City should have stayed out of the middle of this, and the City does not have a lot of money to be attending legal actions, and we don't want to be involved in any. He said he has never sued anyone in his life, and he is 67 years old. He said he plans to live here for the rest of his life, and probably the people that turned them in will do the same, and we want to get it cleared up and try to work with them, and invite anyone that wants to look at their garbage to come by on Tuesday night.

Mayor Young said she was out of town when Mr. Cisneros called her about this, and then she heard he would be at the Council Meeting and she thought that would be the best place to discuss this. She said we have received counsel from our City Attorney. She said she can fully empathize with Mr. and Mrs. Cisneros' position. She asked if the person complaining thought this violation was occurring while they were out of town.

Leahnette Rivers said that sometime in January a citizen came to City Hall and expressed concern that Mr. Cisneros may have been disposing of asbestos siding in his trashcan. She said the citizen said that his house, or one side of his house, had been fully covered with the asbestos siding, and now only a portion of the house had the asbestos siding. She said the citizen did not recall a hazardous substance contractor working on the site, and the citizen thought Mr. Cisneros may have been disposing of the siding in his trashcan. She said the citizen new that Mr. Cisneros was out of town, and the concern was that he had been doing it over a period of time. Ms. Rivers said she told the citizen they should report their concerns to the DEQ.

Ms. Rivers said a few weeks later the citizen returned and again brought up the subject, and asked if the City had reported it to the DEQ. Ms. Rivers said she again instructed the citizen to report the matter to the DEQ, and offered them the DEQ telephone number and website address. However, she said the citizen insisted they did not want their name involved because they were worried about repercussions.

Ms. Rivers said the citizen returned a third time and asked if the City had made the report about the asbestos siding. She said the citizen expressed concern that when the Cisneros' return to town more of the asbestos siding would be disposed of, but again the citizen would not make the report to the DEQ.

Ms. Rivers said at that point she went to the DEQ's website and sent them a message indicating that a citizen had expressed concern to her that one of their neighbor's was disposing of asbestos siding in the trashcan, and to call her if they wanted more information. She said she felt an obligation to get this information to the investigating authority due to the hazardous substance that was involved, and she felt burdened by the information the citizen had passed on to her as the citizen would not make the report.

Mrs. Cisneros asked Ms. Rivers why she could not have waited until they got home since the violation was not happening while they were gone.

Ms. Rivers explained that she was not going to investigate the matter anyway, so she is not sure what difference it would have made.

Mr. Cisneros asked Ms. Rivers if she was going to notify them.

Ms. Rivers said she never meant to offend Mr. and Mrs. Cisneros by not notifying them, and apologized if this did offend them, but it never occurred to her to notify them, and she did not realize it would matter to them. She said the citizen could have, and actually should have, forwarded the same information to the DEQ, and the ending result is the same.

Ms. Rivers said she then called Hudson Garbage Company and talked to Jason Hudson. She said she told Jason that a citizen had, on three occasions, told her that their neighbor might be disposing of asbestos siding in their trashcan. She said she then asked Jason if she should report this type of information to him, and he said she should and asked for the name and address of the person in questions. She said she then gave Jason the information, but she never said it was happening, only that a citizen had repeatedly expressed concern to her that it happening.

Ms. Rivers said that was the extent of the City's involvement, and she certainly didn't pass the information along to DEQ to bad mouth anyone or claim that it was occurring or support that it was happening. She said she only passed the concern on to DEQ so that she would not have to live with the repercussions if it was happening and she had known or been notified and not taken any action.

Mayor Young said once a government entity is made aware of something, right or wrong, they do have an obligation to act. She said if someone came in about a tree that was dangerous and we fail to act, there's liability. She said once we know about something we can't let it lie. She asked Mr. Cisneros if the DEQ has talked with him.

Mr. Cisneros said he called the DEQ, and they said no one has substantiated any claims so they don't pay any attention. Mr. Cisneros said he asked them what would happen if a citizen called in the complaint, and they said they would record the name. He said he asked if they would make the name available to him, and they said they would. He said he does not understand the secrecy, except that the complainant is a coward who falsely accused them while they were out of town, as did the City and Hudson Garbage Service.

Mayor Young said in a small City like this the siding might have been a concern to someone, and they did not want to hurt anyone's feelings, but they also just wanted to make sure that things weren't happing. She said many people are not aware of what we are supposed to and not supposed to do.

Mr. Cisneros said this was none of the City's business. He said it is the DEQ's business, and the City has no obligation to report any rumors, especially unsubstantiated rumors in our absence. He said anybody wanting to know about the whereabouts of those shingles could have asked him and he would have told them. He said there was a remodel 2-1/2 years ago which involved demolition and which involved removing some of the asbestos shingles. He said they don't even know if they are asbestos shingles because they were never tested, but the general contractor, who was licensed, took care of the demolition and the disposal. He said he does not understand why the City is in the middle of this when they have no authority.

Councilor Hudson said in his background he had a duty to act. He said he would share Mr. Cisneros' outrage about a friend doing something like this, if it was a friend. He said he does not know what the motivation is, or what the other person thought they saw, and there might be some exaggeration about the risk of asbestos in this form. He said the actual health threats involved in removing shingles might be minimal in comparison to other forms of asbestos. However, he asked if the City has a duty to report once the City receives the information.

Jim Horn said that is part of the problem right there. He said once you are put on notice, if you don't do anything and there is a resulting problem, the City would have a problem if someone tracked back to the City receiving notice and failing to act. He said the City would then be in the loop of liability because they had knowledge of the problem. He said once the knowledge is here and is not acted upon, the City is open to liability.

Mr. Cisneros said there would be no danger to the environment or to anybody while they were out of town because nothing was going on. He also asked about the secrecy of it all, and said he thought the City was supposed to keep open records. He asked why the City is protecting and respecting some citizens desires and wishes, but not equally respecting another citizen's right to know. He said this is a civil right.

Jim Horn said he has discussed this question with City Attorney Harold Olsen, and there are some exceptions to the public records rule. He referred to exemptions identified in ORS 192.501 and 192.502, and provided Mr. Cisneros with a copy of the statute. Mr. Horn gave an example of someone suspecting a methamphetamine lab and making a report to the City, and being concerned that their name not be released. He said if the City insisted that they must disclose the complainant's name, and then the citizen refused to make the report due to fear of retaliation, the public interest would not be served because the methamphetamine lab would remain.

Mr. Cisneros said that is not a good example because the City has the authority to police that sort of crime.

Mr. Horn said the point is that once the information arrives at the City, the City may not have jurisdiction over it but the City is still in the loop because the City has knowledge.

Micah Olson said public employees have a similar obligation to report child abuse, even though it is not under their jurisdiction.

Mr. Cisneros said the City should not have gotten involved. He said if the citizen was too lazy and cowardly to make the report, the City should have stayed out of it. He said he wants to know who made the report so he does not have to look at every neighbor and wonder if that is the person with the hidden grievance. He said they should have been notified as a common courtesy. He said this false accusation has resulted in all kinds of commotion, turmoil and cost, and people have spent a lot of time and energy on this. He said he will not sue the City or that person, he just wants their name.

Mayor Young suggested we check with the person and see if they might come forward on their own. She said she does not know what action to take on this right now.

Mr. Cisneros said he would appreciate it if the Council would overrule the decision and put this matter to an end in a timely manner. He said he's sure the City would have told this person they were out of town, and there's more than one person in the City office that knows this information.

Mayor Young said the Council will review this and get back to him.

Ken Waite/Finos Lunsford: Ken Waite of Columbia City said a complaint was filed against himself and Finos Lunsford by one of their neighbors. He said he and Finos are neighbors, and Finos has done a nice job of developing his backyard and the alley. He said they both put up some temporary structures and they've been asked by the City to take them down. He said the City staff has been very gracious throughout this process.

Mr. Waite said he and Finos do not believe they deserve any special treatment, but at the same time they should not be the only ones singled out with this problem. He provided the Council with pictures of many similar or more severe problems, all of which are within five blocks of his house. He showed pictures of various travel trailers and boats parked in alleys and covered with blue tarps, a van that's been inoperable and parked in an alley for six or seven years, two boats covered with tarps in an alley, etc.

Mr. Waite said he has 22 feet of undeveloped right-of-way in his front yard, and 47 feet of undeveloped right-of-way on the side of his lot, which measures 50 by 100 feet. He said he's been buying fertilizer and weed killer and maintaining this area. He said if he cannot park in the alley, he'll be forced to park in the street. Mr. Waite provided the Council with pictures of more violations involving the street, including a motor home that's been parked in the street right-of-way for the past 8 years, a camper parked near an intersection and blocking the vision clearance area, a car that was inoperable and parked in the street for many years, etc.

Mr. Waite said he does not want to complain about these other violations, he just wants to bring these other problems to the attention of the City. Mr. Waite said he and Finos both have nice boats, and he has a travel trailer, and they just want to protect their investments. He said it rains sawdust in their neighborhood all summer, and if that gets into the seats and upholstery of a boat they can't get it out.

Mr. Waite said they know the name of the neighbor that complained, but they don't think that knowledge did them any good. He said they would like to negotiate someway to keep their things protected. He said the neighbor keeps her blinds pulled on that side of her house, and he doesn't think she even looks their direction. He said they would be willing to negotiate with her to keep her happy. He said they should have a right to protect the things that they own, and they do understand they are on the City's property. He said they keep the alley clean and free of weeds. He said the alley is graveled and there are no trash piles or brush piles and there's no debris stored in the alley at any time.

Councilor Schmor asked who uses the alley.

Mr. Waite said he and Finos are the only ones that use the alley due to the terrain and elevation of the other homes. He said the complainant's house was dug into the ground in order to meet the height requirements, so her backdoor is probably 8 feet below the level of the alley.

Mr. Waite asked for his pictures back because he only used them to demonstrate what else it out there. He said their temporary sheds can be taken down nearly as quickly as a blue tarp.

Finos Lunsford said referred to photos showing the elevation differences at the north end of the alley and the manner in which the north end of the alley is maintained, or not well maintained. He said they only want to protect their things from the bark dust problem. He provided the Council with pictures showing the saw dust particles covering his patio furniture and the roof of Mr. Waite's shed. He said the buildings are very temporary and do not have foundations.

Ms. Rivers offered some additional background on this subject. She said the City did receive a citizen complaint about the canvas structures and the recreational vehicles (RVs) being parked on the alley right-of-way. She said there are actually three violations involved. She said one violation involves parking the RVs on the City's right-of-way, which is prohibited by the City's parking ordinance. She said secondly, the canvas structure is considered an accessory building by definition of our development code, and therefore it must meet the setback requirements and be placed on private property. Thirdly, she said our development code requires that the siding of an accessory building match the siding of the main structure.

Ms. Rivers said, as shown in the photos Mr. Waite provided, a person could walk around a City block and find multiple violations. She said the City enforces these requirements on a complaint basis. She said when the Planning Commission rewrote the development code last summer, they changed the procedures for these canvas structures. She said prior to the new development code, a person was required to obtain a conditional use permit for one of these canvas structures.

Mr. Waite said only 8 feet of his paved driveway is on his private property, and the rest of his driveway is within the City's right-of-way. He said if you were to drive by his house and Mr. Lunsford's house you would find that they keep their yard and property looking very neat and clean. He said they don't think things would improve if they parked their RVs in front of their homes.

Mayor Young agreed that if we were to drive around town we would find multiple violations.

Councilor Schmor suggested the City consider establishing different setback requirements for the smaller lots. He said applying the setback requirements of a 10,000 square foot lot to a 5,000 square foot lot leaves them practically no usable space. He suggested the setback requirement be reconsidered for the smaller lots.

Mr. Waite said his house was built in the 1940's, and he has only 6 feet between the alley and his garage, 8 feet on the side, and probably only 5 or 6 feet in front of the house. He said the only way he could build a building that would meet the City's code requirements is if he tore off his deck and built something between the house and the garage.

Ms. Rivers noted that she believes the ordinance requires the sides of an accessory building match the sides of the house for aesthetic reasons. She said in her mind the sides on the canvas structure are more aesthetically pleasing than removing them and allowing the RV to show. She said one option might be for them to apply for a permit to use the right-of-way. She said the Council has approved permits in the past for people that want to build a fence or something of that sort in the undeveloped right-of-way. She said if approved, the permit is recorded and the property owner agrees that the City can revoke the permit at any time, and remove the improvements at no cost to the City at any time.

Mayor Young agreed that the canvas structure is much more attractive than a blue tarp.

Ms. Rivers said the blue tarp is legal, as long as the RV is on private property.

Councilor Schmor suggested that they could apply for a permit to use the right-of-way, such as the City has issued in the past for fences.

Ms. Rivers agreed, except that the City's parking ordinance still prohibits parking RVs in the right-of-way.

Councilor Hudson suggested the City hold this complaint in abeyance until the Planning Commission has an opportunity to review the City's ordinances.

Councilor Schmor said he does not believe a canvas cover over a boat would fall into the definition of an accessory building. He said obviously a canvas cover would not be sided in the same manner as a building. He said if it is not spelled out very clearly he does not think a canvas cover would be considered an accessory building. He said he thinks the Planning Commission should look at this and determine whether or not it is reasonable.

Councilor Hudson asked if our code referred to these canvas canopies as membrane structures.

Ms. Rivers said the old ordinance did make reference to them as membrane structures, but the new code does not specifically mention them, which makes the new ordinance less restrictive in terms of these structures.

Councilor Schmor said he would prefer to look at one of these buildings over a blue tarp flapping around.

Mayor Young said the RV storage areas would get a lot of business if we strictly enforced the parking ordinance because they are stored all over town.

Mr. Lunsford said they have been fighting the sawdust problem for 15 years now. He asked for permission to leave the structures up until the sawdust problem is corrected. He said their water bills are probably higher than most because they have to hose things down all of the time. He said if they have to get a permit, he'd ask the Council to waive the fees. He said he would hate to have to pay the permit fee and still take care of the sawdust problem.

Ms. Rivers said currently the City charges a $200.00 fee for a permit to use the right-of-way.

The Council continued to discuss this matter at length with staff, Mr. Lunsford, and Mr. Waite.

MOVED (SCHMOR), SECONDED (HUDSON) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO SUGGEST THAT MR. LUNSFORD AND MR. WAITE APPLY FOR A PERMIT TO THE USE ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, AND THAT THE CITY WAIVE THE PERMIT FEES DUE TO THE ON-GOING SAWDUST PROBLEMS.

It was the consensus of the Council that the Planning Commission be asked to study the parking ordinance, and to study the development code with regard to the regulation of canvas structures and the setback requirements as they apply to small lots.

4.1 Parks Committee: Chair Calnon said Micah Olsen cleared the north end of Jim Bundy Memorial Park in preparation for a parking area. She said they held a dedication ceremony at Harvard Park and hung the park sign, which looks really good. She said a volunteer spent 7-1/2 hours weed-eating in Jim Bundy Memorial Park.

Mr. Cisneros suggested the City consider an additional barrier or fencing of some type at the top of the bank in Datis Park. He said the rope fence will not keep a small child for slipping off the bank and into the blackberries. He also said people frequently park on the grass at the park, and suggested we post signs to keep their vehicles off of the grass.

4.2 Water Source and Development Committee: Micah Olsen said the contractor is finishing the work at the reservoir site. He said they will be landscaping the park area, and overlaying Ninth Street. Leahnette Rivers reported that Harold Olsen will be meeting with Robert Handford, the new General Manager for Dyno Nobel, later this month.

4.3 Streets Committee: Leahnette Rivers said the Columbia River PUD is hosting a lunch to discuss street lighting, and they have asked City Managers to bring an elected official with them if possible. Councilor Hudson said he might be able to attend.

Leahnette Rivers provided Council Members with a Development Plan dated February 10, 2003, for Warren Wickum's street development between Fifth and Sixth Streets. Ms. River's explained that several months ago this matter had come before the Council, and the Coy's had expressed concern about the impact this development will have on two mature trees that are located very close to the City's right-of-way. She said since that meeting, the survey work has been completed and the exact location of the right-of-way with regard to the trees has been determined. She said the trunks of both trees either touch or extend a few inches into the right-of-way. Due to their close proximity to the construction work, she said both trees will need to be removed if the new street is built within the City's right-of-way. In addition, she said the 90-degree corner of the new alley and the new section of "H" Street will be very steep.

In an effort to save the two trees, Ms. Rivers said Mr. Wickum has indicated that he could obtain a permanent public access easement across the northwest corner of the property located at 1955 Fifth Street to construct the corner of the alley and "H" Street. She said this would save the two trees in question, and it would also reduce the slope of the street corner. She provided the Council with copies of a letter dated May 3, 2004, from Joseph Harrity, Tree Specialist and Certified Arborist, speaking to the current health of the trees, the impact the construction of the new road would have on the trees, and how to best protect the trees during the construction work. She said in the letter Mr. Harrity indicated that the construction would not interfere with the overall health of the two trees if the road is developed in the new proposed location and his recommendations are followed.

Ms. Rivers explained that the City Planner, Lisa Smith, has checked with John Rankin, who serves as the City's Planner and Land Use Attorney, and he has suggested that due to the circumstances the City could allow a section of the road to be developed on a public access easement.

The Mayor and Council discussed this matter at length with staff.

Dave Coy of Columbia City said he had talked with Mr. Wickum, who said that moving the road would lessen the grade, and the northwest corner of the lot at 1955 Fifth Street has little value because it is steep and unusable to the owner. He said Mr. Wickum plans to put in a block retaining wall to hold the bank up on the west side of the road. Mr. Coy said he might want to build a fence along the retaining wall when the project is finished.

Ms. Rivers said Mr. Wickum is looking for the City Council's approval to build a portion of the new road on a permanent public access easement as shown on the plans in order to avoid removing the two mature trees and to reduce the slope of the street.

MOVED (HUDSON), SECONDED (SCHMOR) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO ALLOW A PORTION OF THE NEW STREET TO BE LOCATED UPON A PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS, PROVIDED MR. WICKUM BEARS THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPING THE EASEMENT.

Ms. Rivers said ODOT plans to issue the "notice to proceed" for the design engineering for the "L" Street bridge to OBEC, the design engineering company, in June.

The City Council reviewed a memo dated May 5, 2004, from Chief Reedy requesting the City Council send a request for the placement of "rumble strips" or a similar safety device on Highway 30 near the traffic signal. In the memo, Chief Reedy explained that this is the only lighted intersection in Columbia City, yet there have been several crashes at this location, most recently one involving two semi trucks fully loaded. Chief Reedy went on to explain that both trucks lost their loads on the highway, which resulted in a traffic delay for several hours. He further explained that most drivers involved in accidents at this location reported "not seeing the lighted intersection" or "not paying attention" as the cause of the accident. He suggested that based on the number of crashes and other traffic violations in this area, one could surmise drivers get a false sense of the "open road" and do not expect to encounter a traffic light on what appears to be a stretch of "open highway" that runs through Columbia City. He suggested that rumble strips, in addition to the existing flashing yellow lights that are intended to alert drivers of the intersection, might help to reduce the number of accidents and other traffic violations at this intersection.

The Council discussed the recommendation with staff at length. Ms. Rivers said rumble strips can be felt, heard and seen by motorists, but they are not speed bumps. She said temporary rumble strips are currently in place on Highway 30 near the construction in the Linton area.

MOVED (HUDSON), SECONDED (SCHMOR) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO SEND A LETTER FROM THE CITY COUNCIL TO ODOT REQUESTING THE INSTALLATION OF RUMBLE STRIPS AT THE APPROACH OF THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL IN COLUMBIA CITY.

MOVED (HUDSON), SECONDED (CALNON) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO EXTEND THE MEETING TIME TO 10:00 P.M.

4.1 Parks Committee (continued): Ms. Rivers explained that a question about park hours, and whether or not they are posted, was raised during one of the recent Council Meetings. She said City Ordinance No. 345 establishes park hours of 7:00 a.m. to dusk in Harvard Park, and 5:00 a.m. to midnight in all other City parks. She noted that Pixie Park and Ruth Rose Richardson Park are privately owned, and the City's park hours would not apply to them. She said she does not believe the park hours are currently posted in any of the City parks.

The Council discussed this matter at length with staff. It was the consensus of the Council that no action be taken to change any of this until an issue is raised.

The Council reviewed a draft letter dated May 3, 2004, from to Matt Garrett of ODOT, written by Leahnette Rivers on behalf of the City Council and Parks Commission regarding Highway 30 access to Trestle Beach and requesting a bridge to replace the McBride Creek culvert when Highway 30 is widened in the future. It was the consensus of the Council that the letter be sent as written.

4.4 Sewer Committee: No report.

4.5 Library Report: Ms. Rivers said the Friends of the Library would like to use the Community Hall, beginning on Friday, June 4 at 7:00 p.m. and continuing through Sunday evening, June 6 to conduct a book sale. She asked if the Council would waive the fees for the book sale.

MOVED (HUDSON), SECONDED (SCHMOR) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO WAIVE THE COMMUNITY HALL RENTAL FEES FOR THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY BOOK SALE.

Ms. Rivers said the Friends of the Library would like to place a sandwich board sign during the summer months in Harvard Park, and possibly also in Jim Bundy Memorial Park, to advertise the summer library programs.

It was the consensus of the Council that the Friends of the Library be allowed to place sandwich board signs in Harvard and Jim Bundy Memorial Parks this summer to advertise the summer library programs.

4.6 Other Reports: None.

MOVED (CALNON), SECONDED (SCHMOR) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY ROLL CALL VOTE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AGENDA ITEM 6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

The Council completed the second reading of Council Bill No. 04-315.

MOVED (SCHMOR), SECONDED (CALNON) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO ADOPT COUNCIL BILL NO. 04-315.

The Council completed the first reading of Council Bill No. 04-316.

The Council reviewed a quote from TSI regarding costs associated with additional telemetry hardware and software for the water reservoir project. Micah Olson explained that the software that came with the reservoir project allows us to run the telemetry system, but not make changes to it. He said the hardware and software will allow him to go into the system and make a change to a phone number or other data in the system. Without the ability to make changes, he said we would need to pay TSI to make changes. He said he has also asked for additional programming that will reduce manual input and automatically convert data into a spreadsheet for him. In addition, he said the discreet input card will give the computer knowledge of a power outage, as currently the computer does not know if the power goes out at the reservoir site. Finally, he said the maintenance manual will be updated to reflect the changes that are being made. He said the cost estimate is $6,075.00, and the purchase will be funded through the reservoir project funding.

MOVED (SCHMOR), SECONDED (HUDSON) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL TELEMETRY HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE FROM TSI IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,075.00.

Leahnette Rivers explained that this project involves updating the Water, Sewer and Transportation Capital Improvement Plans and SDC studies and charges to incorporate the new UGB expansion area. She explained that the City's capital project needs will change as a result of the new planning area because the current SDC studies and charges do not include the new area that will be served.

Councilor Schmor asked why this should be done if nothing is currently occurring within the UGB area.

Ms. Rivers explained that when a Capital Improvement Plan is developed, and an SDC Study and charges are established, the entire UGB area is included in the planning process. She said because our UGB expanded after our SDCs were in place, the new areas that will be served were not included in the old study. She said updating the studies now will better insure that revenues will be collected to pay for the growth related portions of the system improvements in the future. She said MSA's estimated budget for the project is $10,000.00 to $11,000.00, and SDC revenues can be used to fund the project.

MOVED (HUDSON), SECONDED (CALNON) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THE SCOPE OF WORK AS PRESENTED BY MSA.

Leahnette Rivers requested authorization to sign the Washington Mutual Treasury Management Service Agreement and related applications for ACH Transactions for direct deposit for payroll credit ability in the amount of $35,000.00 and direct utility bill debit ability in the amount of $10,000.00.

MOVED (SCHMOR), SECONDED (CALNON) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO AUTHORIZE SIGNATURE TO THE AGREEMENT AND RELATED APPLICATIONS.

MOVED (SCHMOR), SECONDED (CALNON) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO RATIFY THE DECISION TO HIRE JULIAN (J.R.) RIBERA AS PUBLIC WORKS UTILITY WORKER I AT STEP I OF THE SALARY RANGE.

The Council convened in Executive Session at 9:50 p.m.

The Council reconvened in Open Session at 10:08 p.m.

AGENDA ITEM 8 OTHER BUSINESS:

Double Tee Concerts: Sergeant Harper discussed the Columbia County Land Development Services' Referral and Acknowledgment for the Double Tee Concerts that will be held this year at the old Columbia County Fairgrounds property with the Council. He suggested the City request notification of any proposed changes to the traffic plan and be given an opportunity to comment on proposed changes as the traffic from the concerts has a significant impact on Columbia City. In addition, because they plan to schedule 10 concerts this summer, he suggested the City request compensation for the additional police services required of the City during the concerts.

It was the consensus of the Council that these comments be submitted to Columbia County Land Development Services.

Bronze Plaque memorializing William and Juniata MaClay: Leahnette Rivers explained that members of the DAR found a bronze plaque in a storage area in the Knapp Social Center. She said the plaque memorializes William MaClay, Columbia City's first Mayor, and Juniata MaClay, Co-owner of Columbia City's first water system in 1919. She said the DAR does not know where the plaque was intended to be placed, but they suggested it might be placed in front of City Hall. It was the consensus of the Council that the DAR select a location in front of City Hall.

Request for No Parking zone: The Council reviewed a letter dated April 4, 2004, from Aaron Troutman requesting the placement of a "no parking" sign in front of his house at 1835 Second Street because public gatherings have negative effects on his property due to people blocking his driveway and damaging his lawn. It was the consensus of the Council that the request be denied because there is a need for on street parking periodically in the area due its proximity to community gatherings.

Corrections to Resolution No. 04-806-R: Leahnette Rivers explained that Resolution No. 04-806-R rescinded another Resolution, but she had put in the wrong Resolution No. and adoption date for the rescinded Resolution. She said the correct number and adoption date for the rescinded Resolution is 00-690-R and February 17, 2000.

MOVED (HUDSON), SECONDED (CALNON) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO CORRECT RESOLUTION NO. 04-806-R TO RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 00-690-R ADOPTED ON FEBRUARY 17, 2000 AND TO NOT RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 00-691-R ADOPTED ON MARCH 3, 2000.

Port request for Council Representative: The Council reviewed a letter dated April 29, 2004, from Colleen DeShazer, President of the Port of St. Helens Board of Commissioners, requesting Columbia City identify a Council representative to be involved in the project involving possible location of a world-class speedway near the airport in Scappoose. The Council considered the request, and Leahnette Rivers will check with Councilor Guy to see if he is willing to serve.

Col-Pac Dues: The Council reviewed a letter dated April 23, 2004, from Mary McArthur, Executive Direction for Columbia Pacific Economic Development District, requesting the City include a $250.00 annual membership in their Economic Development District.

MOVED (HUDSON), SECONDED (SCHMOR) AND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO PAY THE COL-PAC DUES IN THE AMOUNT OF $250.00 FOR 2004/05 FISCAL YEAR.

AGENDA ITEM 9 ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at 10:08 p.m.

Return to Columbia City home page