JANUARY 9, 2006


The Regular Meeting of the Beaverton City Council was called to order by Mayor Rob Drake in the Forrest C. Soth Council Chamber, 4755 SW Griffith Drive, Beaverton, Oregon, on Monday, January 9, 2006, at 6:40 p.m.


Present were Mayor Drake, Couns. Catherine Arnold, Betty Bode, Dennis Doyle, Fred Ruby and Cathy Stanton. Also present were City Attorney Alan Rappleyea, Chief of Staff Linda Adlard, Finance Director Patrick O'Claire, Community Development Director Joe Grillo, Engineering Director Tom Ramisch, Operations/Maintenance Director Gary Brentano, Library Director Ed House, Human Resources Director Nancy Bates, Police Chief David Bishop, and City Recorder Sue Nelson.


Appointment of City Council President 2006

Mayor Drake said at this time each year the Council nominates a council member as Council President for the current year; he said he would accept a motion for City Council President for 2006.

Coun. Bode MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Doyle to nominate Coun. Cathy Stanton for Council President.

Couns. Arnold, Bode, Doyle, Ruby and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously. (5:0)

Mayor Drake thanked Coun. Bode and said she was an excellent person to work with and an outstanding Council president.

06001 Presentation of Shields and Swearing In of Four Officers to the Beaverton Police Department

Police Chief David Bishop swore in the new officers: Jason Billings, Joshua Griffin, David VanCleve, and Jeffrey Young. Mayor Drake presented them with their shields.

Chief Bishop noted it was his 13 th anniversary as Chief of Police with the City of Beaverton.


Henry Kane said Council had received his letters regarding the Highway 217 Recommendations, the Metro Transportation Policy Alternatives Committee and A Proposed Resolution on Various Road Improvements, (in the record). He suggested Council inform the Oregon Transportation Committee that Beaverton opposed closure of access to and from Highway 217 at Allen and Denney Road. He said a decision regarding a toll road would mean that all of Highway 217 would become a toll road and that closure would be catastrophic in terms of diversion of traffic onto Hall Blvd. and other city streets.

David James, Beaverton, said he was disappointed Council had not acted on the dangers of walking on Walker Road since his previous visit to Council within the last year. He said there had been no safety improvements on Walker; the street had not been widened but $3 million dollars had been spent on the Cornell Road Project. He asked Council to walk the seven blocks of Walker Road from 173 rd to 180 th and they would see the dangers of walking on the road. He said he would come back to Council and ask for their opinions next week.

Mayor Drake replied that Walker Road was part of Washington County's roadway arterial system and the City was not responsible to improve it. He said there had been a study done by the Major Street Transportation Improvement Program (MSTIP) on Walker Road between 185th east to Canyon Road and it appeared from that study the County may choose to improve the east end of Walker Road. He said that on multiple occasions he had asked the Washington County Coordinating Committee (WCCC) and he had also asked privately for the County to consider improving the stretch of road Mr. James was concerned about. He said it was one of the many roads in the County that was considered subs tandard. He said the County had not decided on the Walker Road improvements but the City had asked them to improve it west of 162nd (west of Stonegate, in the Five Oaks/Triple Creek Neighborhood). He reiterated that Walker Road had been discussed multiple times.

James said he had spoken many times with Washington County officials about how funding for road projects was allocated and he believed the City could have great influence on County decisions.

Mayor Drake responded by saying Walker Road was the responsibility of the County to design and fund.


Coun. Bode noted that there were many ways people could have contact with the City of Beaverton, including Press representation and televised Council meetings. She said the City provided streaming video of all Council meetings, the City Learning Series as well as infomercials about the Code Services Program. She said that 1,400 people used the City Website to access the streaming video files and that the daily Website usage averaged 3,000 visits with 10,000 Website pages accessed per day. She said a total of 45,000 people visited the Website in November 2005. She said people connected one-on-one and also in the privacy of their own homes to look up very specific information. She noted that Code Services received 204 complaints from citizens in November 2005,

with abandoned auto complaints at the top of the list. She noted that 50% of the complaints were by telephone, 18-20% accessed the Website, and 4% walked in while others sent a few faxes and emails. She concluded by saying there was a variety of ways citizens connected with the City regarding traffic and other concerns.

Mayor Drake said it was important that the public knew that a street like Walker Road was within City limits, but the County maintained both the funding and design of that street. He said the City provided law enforcement for all areas inside the City boundaries.

Coun. Bode asked Mayor Drake to explain who owned Scholls Ferry Road.

Mayor Drake replied that the new part of Scholls Ferry Road was owned by the County after the State improved it and turned it over to the County. He explained it was roughly between Murray Blvd. up to Progress. He asked the City Transportation Engineer if Scholls Ferry Road east of Hall Blvd. was still a State roadway.

Randy Wooley , City Transportation Engineer, said Scholls Ferry Road. was mostly County controlled with the exception of the roadway near the freeway (near Washington Square where it crossed Highway 217) through the interchange area. He noted that part of the roadway still belonged to the State.

Coun. Stanton said January 9, 2006 at the Washington County Public Affairs Forum former Secretaries of State Phil Keisling and Norma Paulus both spoke about an Initiative to allow an Open Primary Election.

Coun. Stanton noted that on January 23, 2006, Mayor Drake would give the State of the City address at the Washington County Public Affairs Forum.

Coun. Stanton said that on January 26, 2006, Tom Brian, Chair of the Washington County Board of Commissioners, would speak at the Westside Economic Alliance Breakfast Forum. She commented that there were lots of opportunities to learn about things going on in the community.

Coun. Stanton thanked Coun. Bode for her work as the 2005 Council President in keeping the Council informed on issues. She noted that she hoped she would do as well as 2006 Council President.

Coun. Ruby said the Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebration had gotten better and better every year. He said that the program was partly sponsored by the City and partly sponsored by Portland Community College (PCC). He said the celebration had been moved to the PCC Rock Creek Campus this year. He explained that the celebration was a broad coalition of different community and government groups that had coordinated efforts to build a program of fellowship and intercultural aspects. He said there would be some southern comfort food served and he encouraged everyone to attend on Sunday, January 15, 2006, at 2:00 p.m.

Mayor Drake noted that the Vision Action Network and the Inter-religious Action Network of Washington County were also major sponsors of the program. He said it was the Inter-religious Action Network that assisted with the Unity Walk in Beaverton in October 2005.


There were none.


Coun. Stanton MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Doyle that the Consent Agenda be approved as follows:

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 12, 2005

06002 Liquor Licenses: New Outlet - El Tapatio Mexican Restaurant; Change of Ownership - Treasure Island Restaurant; Change of Ownership & Greater Privilege - Haerim Restaurant

06003 Boards and Commissions Appointment - Ray Bowman to Beaverton Committee for Citizen Involvement

06004 Traffic Commission Issues No:

TC 585 - Repeal of Two-Hour Parking Restrictions on SW Cascade Avenue;

TC 586 - Parking Restrictions on SW Sagehen Street, SW Chukar Terrace and SW Bunting Street;

TC 587 - Parking Restrictions on SW Larch Place;

TC 588 - Revisions to Traffic Enhancement Fund Project

Mayor Drake noted that Coun. Stanton had requested to pull AB 06004 for separate consideration.

Contract Review Board:

06009 Declaration of Surplus Property and Authorization to Dispose of Surplus Property (Resolution No. 3847)

Coun. Stanton commented on AB 06009 and explained that the Westgate Theatre had been purchased by the City. She noted that the contents of the theatre would be dismantled and sold. She encouraged people to visit the State of Oregon Website if they were interested in purchasing some of the surplus property.

Question called on the motion (with AB 06004 pulled for separate consideration). Couns. Arnold, Bode, Doyle, Ruby and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously. (5:0)

Coun. Stanton said she had minor corrections to the minutes of December 12, 2005, that she would present to the City Recorder.

06004 (Pulled for Separate Consideration)

Coun. Stanton said she had some questions concerning Agenda Bill 06004, Traffic Commission Issue 588, (TC 588) - Revisions to Traffic Enhancement Fund Project Allocations. She explained that in 1996 the City had a tax base that incorporated a serial levy for Police and a component for traffic enhancement projects. She said in the new Traffic Enhancement List, the original resolution (Resolution No. 3364) authorized a tax base levy election. She said the City had dedicated $2.982 million dollars to improve traffic light signalization and timing and to provide neighborhood congestion relief. She said that over the years $2.182 million dollars had been spent which left a balance in the fund. She explained that 45% of the actual total had been expended, with 21% spent for traffic calming. She said that only 19 and ½% of the new projects would be for traffic calming.

Coun. Stanton commented that according to a June 15, 1998, memo written by Interim Engineering Director Jim Rapp (in the record) Council's thoughts at that time were to use the money to improve signalization and enhance neighborhoods and school zones. She said she was concerned that in the new projects funding less than 20% would go to traffic calming. She noted that staff responded to her written Council question of January 9, 2005 (in the record) indicating there was less traffic calming issues in neighborhoods, but she did not see it totally disappearing.

Coun. Stanton referred to AB 06004, page 19, Traffic Expenditures, items number 15 (Traffic Calming Phase 5 - Heather Lane; 170th Dr) and 17(Traffic Calming Phase 6 - Indian Hill, 6th, Davies, 155th) and said the list indicated a $215,000 difference between the previous budget and the total estimated cost for Phases 5 and 6. She asked if that was because the estimation was not accurate or the projects were not yet completed in those phases. She said if the projects were not completed then there was a $215,000 shortfall based on the numbers on Attachment A and a traffic calming reserve of $31,800 was not going to meet that $215,000 difference.

Wooley explained that several of the projects did not go through to construction. He explained that in the case of Indian Hill and Davies in Phase 6, the neighbors in the neighborhood meeting process decided to withdraw from the program. He said that when the City estimated the costs, they expected those projects to be constructed. He noted that in the case of Heather Lane they did not get the 67% support from citizens for the neighborhood design; consequently that project did not go through. He said that was a big share in the reduction in costs.

Wooley said another reason for the estimated costs was that the City realized the proposed projects qualified and were put on the list, but there was no design at that point. He said the City estimated the projects would take the most expensive traffic calming devices and they wanted to make sure there would be enough money in the fund. He said all of the recent cases had consisted primarily of speed humps, which were not that expensive. He said there had been some savings there without landscape islands and other expensive features included. He explained the City was getting better prices because some of the work was being done in-house by the City Operations crews.

Wooley said the projects in Phases 5 and 6 were completed. He explained that the estimates noted in the agenda bill were very close to the final cost.

Coun. Stanton said that in the 1996 tax base there was $2.982 million dollars set aside for signalized timing and traffic enhancement. She said that even with the new projects the total was only $2.55 million dollars and she asked if it would be good to keep the rest of the money in reserve. She asked if the City had any fiduciary or legal responsibility to spend the money just within the confines of what the tax base said.

Patrick O’Claire, Finance Director, replied that there was another component of the Traffic Calming and Signalization program included in the $2.9 million dollars. He noted that component was hiring staff. He said the schedule showed $775,000 per year for three years to the actual construction program (detailed in the agenda bill). He noted that amount was $2.3 million dollars. He said the reason there was actually $2.5 million dollars in the construction fund was because those funds were collected in FY 98/99 and FY 2000 and interest had been earned on those funds in the construction activities to actually provide more money than what had originally been raised. He reminded Council that three staff members were hired to handle the design and construction oversight of all of the projects and those were included in the General Fund and not in the Traffic Construction Fund.

Coun. Stanton said she thought she heard O'Claire say that with interest more money had been spent. She said almost $3 million dollars should have been spent, but only $2.56 million dollars would be spent.

O'Claire said that $2 million dollars also included staff salaries for the last five years, which was not part of the Construction Fund, but part of the General Fund. He said that would equal about $220,000 to $250,000 a year for the staff.

Coun. Stanton said she would like a bigger fund for traffic enhancement. She said she would like to hear comments from the other Councilors about how they felt about having only $31,000 in the Traffic Calming Reserve, when there was $377,000 in new projects and only $31,800 was going to remain for the traffic calming reserve.

Mayor Drake explained that the money this year would be expended and was completely accounted for, both in equipment, design and staff to actually implement the program. He said one of the large shares of staff time regarding traffic calming was working with the neighborhoods and hearing what everyone had to say, assessing the votes on the projects, and holding the public hearings. He noted that it had been extremely time intensive and had been a great program for citizens. He reiterated that the roughly $3 million dollars was accounted for and based on the initial estimates, City staff had been able to provide many more projects than they had actually anticipated initially by working with the neighborhoods. He said some were not completed, but the projects that had been requested to date were finished and the initial list of projects through day-to-day work and solicitation of requests were complete.

Mayor Drake said that as more traffic calming projects were identified that he would recommend the allocation of gas tax money or other sources of funding through the budget process. He said that the City would always improve traffic signalization to put signals where they were needed. He said the City would have completed what had been committed to the voters as part of the tax base and then Council could decide annually what they wanted to spend on traffic calming and/or signal improvements.

Coun. Stanton asked if there would be any savings on completion from the Traffic Calming Reserve of $31,000 from the new projects or from completion of the old projects. She said that $225,000 had been budgeted for a new (yet to be identified) signal. She said if that signal came in under budget would there be a mechanism in this agenda item that remaining funds would go into the Traffic Calming Reserve.

O’Claire explained that the $31,811 was anticipated to be left over after everything was done this fiscal year. He said if things came in less expensive that reserve would grow. He said it was just like the beginning working capital the City would have for this particular project category beginning next fiscal year.

Coun. Stanton asked if any project that came in under budget would go into the Traffic Calming Reserve and any project that went over budget would come out of the Traffic Calming Reserve even though it would not be a traffic calming issue to cover the shortfall.

O'Claire said that would be the recommendation.

Mayor Drake said part of the selling point initially of the new tax base was making the Police Serial Levy permanent and allowing the Police numbers to grow incrementally as the City's population grew. He said the City had synchronized signals, but there was a huge increase in traffic traveling through the City due to development both in adjoining cities and in the county. He noted that citizens had requested that the traffic signals be coordinated and the City had cooperated with the State and the County on that issue. He said he had heard as much from citizens regarding traffic signal timing as he had heard about traffic calming in neighborhoods. He said that people generally loved living on a street where traffic calming was installed, because it improved their livability. He said he also heard from drivers upset after going through a neighborhood with traffic calming. He stated that he would explain to those drivers that traffic calming was not meant to keep people from going through a neighborhood but it was designed to allow travel through the neighborhoods at a sane and safer speed. He said most people understood but others did not and those people would never be happy about traffic calming. He said there were neighborhoods that needed it for the safety of kids and to maintain property values.

Coun. Stanton said her only concern was that the City will have funds available as neighborhoods developed and as people found alternate routes other than traffic clogged arterials. She said the fund needed to be maintained for future problems of cut through traffic in neighborhoods.

Coun. Bode said if 125 th Street was completed, there would not be so much cut through traffic in residential neighborhoods considering the number of schools in that location. She said there was always the balance on funding new projects, but she thought something was owed to the long-term established neighborhoods. She said it was important to pay close attention to the established neighborhoods and not just to the new developments and to look at the richness the old neighborhoods possessed. She said that the traffic patterns and the congestion were points to be considered in the up-coming budget. She noted that she would like to see more work done on 125th Street. She said the traffic was just phenomenal in that section of roadway and it directly affected safety and livability. She said if 125th Street had traffic improvements, less money would have to be poured into the subdivisions for traffic calming. She noted that the cut through traffic in that area was due to commuters on their way to and from work. She said Council could look at that during budget time this spring.

Coun. Doyle said he read the staff reply (in the record) to Coun. Stanton's questions and he was very confident that the Traffic Commission spent time on two occasions looking at the issues. He commended the Traffic Commission for their work. He said flashing beacons in school zones at Southridge and Sunset High Schools were long overdue. He said he was glad the video detection systems were in place and he was happy with the changes.

Mayor Drake said it was interesting to look at funding sources for roadways. He said the MSTIP Program was a one time levy that voters in the county approved. He explained that when Ballot Measure 50 was approved by the voters after Ballot Measure 47 it made that funding levy continuous. He said the County Commission (though they were not legally bound to spend that money only on roadways) be consistent with what the voters had approved. He said that prior to Ballot Measures 47 and 50 they made a verbal commitment and by action had continued to put that money toward road improvements. He said he shuddered to think what roadway needs would be if the Commissioners hadn't put that money beyond Ballot Measures 47 and 50. He said Ballot Measure 47 passed in 1996 and Ballot Measure 50 passed in 1997. He said the point that made the Cities a little sore was all that money was being put into just the County road system although that money was coming from City voters too. He commented that at least the money was going to roads in the county, which most drivers used when they left the city or to county roads within the City. He said the Commissioners deserved a pat on the back for consistently using the money for roadways.

Coun. Doyle asked if there was information on the City Website or a contact at the City where one could find out about accessible pedestrian signals, which provided audible and tactile information for visually impaired pedestrians.

Wooley said calls could be made to the City Engineering Office as well as questions could be directed through email at He noted that written communication could be addressed to the Engineering Department.

Coun. Arnold said she had served as liaison for the Citizens with Disabilities Advisory Committee (CDAC) and that group actively and regularly looked for specific needs within the City. She said she was happy to see funds allocated for help with crosswalks.

Coun. Doyle said he had gotten many positive comments regarding signals with the countdown capabilities. He said citizens should contact the City as mentioned earlier through the telephone, by email or by written communication.

Coun. Stanton MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Bode for approval of Agenda Bill 06004. Couns. Arnold, Bode, Doyle, Ruby and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously. (5:0)


06005 Public Hearing on Biggi Investment Partnership Measure 37 Claim

Alan Rappleyea, City Attorney, said Measure 37 had been declared unconstitutional by a circuit court in Marion County and was currently on expedited appeal to the Supreme Court. He said the Biggi’s had agreed to postpone this matter until after the Supreme Court ruled. He said if the Supreme Court called it unconstitutional there would be no need for a hearing and if it was declared valid then the City would have 40 days in which to conduct a hearing to hear this matter. He recommended Council continue this matter until after the Supreme Court's decision and that as this was a date uncertain that Council direct staff to re-notice the public hearing.

Mayor Drake said that anyone who had gotten notice of this claim originally and that would have had interest in this claim would be re-noticed. He said there was sufficient time within the 40-days to re-notice people.

Rappleyea agreed that was correct.

Coun. Bode asked if this issue required a motion.

Mayor Drake said since there had been a pubic hearing with notice that night, Council would have to take an action.

Coun. Ruby MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Doyle that the hearing be continued to after the Supreme Court had decided the constituently of Measure 37 and at the time of such decision direct staff to re-notice the hearing. Couns. Arnold, Bode, Doyle, Rudy and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED, unanimously. (5:0)

Coun. Arnold asked if the Biggi’s had to give the City the continuance.

Rappleyea said that information was in the correspondence between the Biggi's and the City. He said the Biggi's had agreed to 40 days additional time after the hearing. He said the Supreme Court decision could be expected before June 2006.

Mayor Drake reiterated that the hearing would be continued to after a decision by the Supreme Court. He said that once that decision had been rendered, the City agreed to a hearing no more than 40 days after the decision and would notice those that were required to be noticed. He said a public hearing would be held by the Beaverton City Council.

Coun. Stanton stated that notice would be given to those required to be noticed and also anyone who had expressed either verbal or written interest.

06006 Adopt Resolution and Authorize Implementation of Building, Mechanical, and Electrical Permit Fee Increases (Resolution No. 3846)

Coun. Stanton thanked Brad Roast, Building Official, for providing complete information on the Fee increases.

Mayor Drake opened the Public Hearing.

There was no one that wished testify.

Mayor Drake closed the Public Hearing.

Coun. Stanton MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Doyle for approval of AB06006, Adopting a Resolution and Authorizing Implementation of Building, Mechanical, and Electrical Permit Fee Increases. Couns. Arnold, Bode, Doyle, Ruby and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously. (5:0)

Coun. Stanton said that this was done every year for all different permit fees across the board because, besides inflation, there were salaries and staff time to take into consideration. She said that depending on state and federal law, the City had to spend more time in detail looking at building regulations. She noted that every time the legislature met there were changes to the building code that the City had to incorporate and administer on behalf of the State. She said that by looking at the fees each year, it made it more comfortable for Developers to know they would not all of a sudden have fees double.

Coun. Doyle said the Community Development Staff worked with professional builders including the members of the Development Liaison Committee (DLC). He said the DLC was a formal committee where members experienced correspondence and advisement from the City.


Coun. Stanton MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Doyle, that the rules be suspended, and that the ordinances embodied in Agenda Bills 06007 and 06008, be read for the first time by title only at this meeting, and for the second time by title only at the next regular meeting of the Council. Couns. Arnold, Bode, Doyle, Ruby and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously. (5:0)

First Reading:

Rappleyea read the following ordinances for the first time by title only:

06007 An Ordinance Annexing One Parcel Located at 16930 SW Spellman Drive to the City of Beaverton: Expedited Annexation 2005-0012 (Ordinance No. 4378)

06008 An Ordinance Annexing Three Parcels and Associated Right of Way, Located at 16655 SW Scholls Ferry Road in the City of Beaverton and Adding the Property to the Neighbors Southwest Neighborhood Association Committee: Expedited Annexation 2005-0009 (Ordinance No. 4379)


Coun. Bode MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Ruby, that Council move into executive session in accordance with ORS 192.660(2)(h) to discuss the legal rights and duties of the governing body with regard to litigation or litigation likely to be filed. Couns. Arnold, Bode, Doyle, Ruby and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously. (5:0)


Mayor Drake called for a brief recess at 7:45 p.m.


Mayor Drake reconvened the meeting at 8:00 p.m.

The executive session convened at 8:00 p.m.

The executive session adjourned at 9:05 p.m.

The regular meeting reconvened at 9:05 p.m.

O’Claire said he would like to summarize the motion; Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Transfer Resolution Appropriating $75,000, from the Insurance Fund Reserve to the Professional Services Account.

Coun. Ruby MOVED, SECONDED by Coun. Doyle that Council Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Transfer Resolution Appropriating $75,000 from the Insurance Fund Reserve to the Professional Services account. Couns. Arnold, Bode, Doyle, Ruby and Stanton voting AYE, the MOTION CARRIED unanimously. (5:0)


There being no further business to come before the Council at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m.



Sue Nelson, City Recorder




Approved this 23rd day of January, 2006.

Rob Drake, Mayor