From: Dan Huff
Sent: Wed Apr 10 08:37:42 2019
To: Kelly Richardson; Gerald Fisher; Christie DeSantis; Chaunee Seifried
Subject: FW: Agenda Items
Importance: Normal
Just so you are all prepared for questions tonight.
From: Dan Huff
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 8:37 AM
To: Leota Childress <lchildress@cityofmolalla.com>
Cc: Keith Swigart <kswigart@cityofmolalla.com>; Elizabeth Klein <eklein@cityofmolalla.com>
Subject: RE: Agenda Items
I commented in green. This is becoming colorful.
From: Leota Childress <lchildress@cityofmolalla.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2019 4:40 PM
To: Dan Huff <dhuff@cityofmolalla.com>
Cc: Keith Swigart <kswigart@cityofmolalla.com>; Elizabeth Klein <eklein@cityofmolalla.com>
Subject: Re: Agenda Items
Oh my gosh, it's so nice to be missed. My week is so dull without our chats and laughs. I'm scheduled to sign checks Thursday or Friday so I'll be in then.
Thank you for the responses. My replies to your red comments are below in bold blue.
Leota Childress
City Council
City of Molalla
503.829.6855
From: Dan Huff
Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2019 3:09 PM
To: Leota Childress
Cc: Keith Swigart; Elizabeth Klein
Subject: RE: Agenda Items
Glad you are on the mend. We have missed you dropping in! I have some comments below in red.
From: Leota Childress <lchildress@cityofmolalla.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2019 1:05 PM
To: Dan Huff <dhuff@cityofmolalla.com>
Cc: Keith Swigart <kswigart@cityofmolalla.com>; Elizabeth Klein <eklein@cityofmolalla.com>
Subject: Agenda Items
Hi Dan, I'm on the mend at last but still staying in. I have a couple of few questions
New $1,000 special event fee? I don't recall any discussion on this. We did talk about this, but I think it was a little confusing. One issue is that we eliminated the park use fee proposal because of recreational immunity. We believe that having a special event fee makes sense since the impact to our police department and or public works department can be large. However, we do provide the caveat that non-profits (Chamber, Kiwanis, etc., ) will not be charged. Where is this spelled out? This is what we do now. The $1,000 event fee is currently in our policies but not in the resolution.
- * Going from zero to $1,000 is a big jump. We already charge this fee for Buckeroo, Carnival and Mexican Rodeo. The circus is coming to town but because that is sponsored by the Chamber, the event fee won't apply, correct? No – And we have already delivered that message to the Chamber.
- * Will this fee apply to the Buckeroo (Yes. They pay us $4,000 every year now), 4th of July parade (No), Halloween Downtown (No, this was actually a City event), Farmer's Market when it grows (No), etc.? I know we can waive fees but how would we judge which events are worthy of a fee waiver (Non – profits will always be waived unless they serve alcohol)? This is similar, in that respect, to a request we had before us a couple of years ago to waive the insurance requirement for the Second Friday event. I think Second Friday is different. We were discussing waiving liability insurance. You are correct. I was thinking about that in the vein of making"exceptions". If it comes back we would need another review. The issue with second Friday is the sales issue.
- * Fee Ordinance regarding tent use note: "Pull this fee as we do not currently use except for City and Chamber events. Cost for a 4 man crew for 3hrs set up is over 1,000 set up fee. (???) So remove fee." Is this referring to the $1,000 event fee? No different subject. What if the event doesn't meet the criteria for a special event fee and wants to rent the tent?
- * Do other cities charge such fees? Yes, and or specifically bill city staff hours. Actual cost for large events like the Buckeroo exceed $10,000 I couldn't find one on websites for cities of Silverton and Canby.
Allocation of County Vehicle Registration funds
- * Are the highlighted projects the ones that we are planning to do first? I probably didn't pay close enough attention to the ranking before. This is a discussion for a future time but I'd like to keep it on the radar. Some of the items include Highways 213 and 211. These projects are suggestions from Gerald, after discussion with Council, that he believes will fit with the fee. I will readily admit that I don't recall discussing priorities that included improvements relative to the State Hwys and think this should be revisited. That is why this is in front of you all, you are the Governing Body and have that authority to make that call. We are just putting things in front of you to foster dialog. No personal attachment from us.
SDCs
- * What would a phase-in look like? Over one to 5 years. But you can also set the fee so it is in place sometime in the future like January 1, 2020.
- * I'm sure we are raising some of these to fund the new WWTP and street maintenance, but there is a significant impact of drastically lowering park fees. Not really. We have almost built out our residential land and we do not believe there is a significant opportunity left. Oh, right, and SDCs don't cover ongoing maintenance. So many details!
- * Does "set SDCs below their calculated amount" mean that we can change what is proposed? That's what I assume. Yes.
Article III. Planning Commission
2.06.030 Adoption of rules for conduct of hearings. The Hearings Officer is authorized to adopt (this section is deleted) shall follow rules of procedure for the conduct of hearings pursuant to this chapter., provided through ordinances and Development Code.
The Hearings Officer
- * Are the rules of procedure in ordinances and Develoopment Code? I don't see them in this chapter. Could this be written more clearly?
2.06.100 Created—Composition—Compensation. A.1.a.2. No more than two voting members may be non-residents of the city, provided they live within the Urban Growth Boundary. There shall be more residents of the city than non-residents sitting on the board at all times.
- * Note I received from Jennifer Satter, current Planning Commission member: " I just wanted to give some input about some of the proposed changes to the Planning Commission, If it is changed to not allow for commissioners outside the city limit, then I won't be able to be on the planning commission any longer. I believe that there is another person on the PC also not in the city limits. Personally I think that it is allowed that way for 2 reasons, 1) its hard to find volunteers for planning commission, its actually a lot of work and a crazy amount of reading and 2) it accounts for the fact that there are citizens that have interest in seeing the city grow and succeed that don't necessarily live in the city limits"
- * She makes some very good points. Do we have two planning commission members who live outside the City limits and UGB? And, if Raelynnn applies to the Council, will we have anyone left on the commission?
- * Do we limit the Council to no more than two non-residents who live within the UGB? If not, we are imposing more strenuous rules to a commission than to the Council.
This is strictly up to Council. Most cities do have a UGB requirement. However, Molalla City Council has full authority to do what is best for the community either way.
2.06.110 Terms of members. B. Unexcused absences from three regular meetings may disqualify a member at which time the Planning Commission may request that the Mayor appoint a replacement.
- * In the future if we plan to dismiss members for excessive unexcused absences, are we supposed to solicit for a new member beforehand
Placement of Coyote and Grizzly
- * Will the installation on that pad coincide with installing another pad that will be ADA accessible from Molalla Ave? I don't see how we can get both on the existing pad. There is another existing ADA pad in Long Park currently. Bottom line, you are correct there is no sharing of concrete pads in city government. However, we will be placing a new pad in a different location in the park this summer. Got it.
Leota Childress
City Council
City of Molalla
503.829.6855