Current Issues for the Forest Grove City Council

First posted on 29 June 1997, last update 17 August 1998:
Council is currently considering or has recently considered several issues:
  1. Backyard Burning
    A proposal by the mayor to eventually ban backyard burning and provide for alternative means of disposing of yard debris. Should the City require universal garbage collection to keep rates reasonable? The City applied for, but did not receive, a grant to provide chipping services. This issue is still on hold. Several members of council would like to ban backyard burning immediately. I am reluctant to make it a majority without first providing an alternative at reasonable cost. We could certainly do more to enforce the current laws which prohibit smoke drifting onto any neighbor's property. At least one local attorney has voiced his intention to pursue legal action against anyone who allows smoke to drift onto his property. Update (7/98): The new owners of Forest Grove Disposal have been busy responding to neighborhood concerns about noise, lights, and odors. We are still waiting for a proposal from them for yard debris collection.
     
  2. Residential Standards
    A request for a variance from local street grade standards was requested for the new David Hill Estates development. You can find the current standards in the newly adopted Residential Standards Ordinance, but the application for this development was filed under the old standards, which permit a maximum grade of 10%. Final action on this variance should come to the Council on 14 July 1997. Update (7/98): The variance was granted with some minor additional conditions. The disposition of this development is currently being delayed by court action.
     
  3. Maintaining the "Infrastructure"
    Considering the city's program for replacing old sewer and water lines. During the recently completed budget hearings, I was amazed to find that staff's goals for the coming year have actually been reduced. Under the current goals, we seem to expect sewer lines to last 300 years and water lines 400 years! Considering that some of the former which are less than thirty years old are already shot, this seems incredible to me. Council will receive a staff report on this during the summer and consider our options. Update (1/98): Public works agrees that this is a problem, and will try to incorporate a stepped-up replacement program into the budget next year. So far, it appears that the street fund, which does not rely on tax moneys from the general fund, will be able to bear this cost.
     
  4. Transportation Planning Rule
    The Transportation Planning Rule, the issue the previous Council wanted to just go away, was the subject of a recent work session at which Council went over the proposed ordinances as they were last amended (August, 1996). A few revisions were made, but the most controversial sections, revisions to the Zoning Ordinance, were left for future meetings.Update(1/98): The TPR is on the agenda for mid-January, 1998. I am optimistic that it will pass at that time. Update(7/98):The TPR was, indeed, adopted. However, the most controversial part, requiring buildings to be located on the front half of the property and oriented in such a way as to facilitate pedestrian and transit access was diluted by exempting businesses east of Oak Street from the building orientation provisions.
     
  5. Standards for Residential Subdivisions
    Currently under consideration by the Planning Commission, and the subject of a recent forum, are revisions to the Residential Standards Ordinance to adapt it to steeper terrain. Most of the remaining residential development in Forest Grove will occur in the David Hill area where typical lots will be on grades of 13% to 22%. Should density standards be decreased on steeper sites? Update (1/98): The new standards for steep terrain passed its first reading before the City Council on Dec. 8, and should be adopted in Jan., 1998.
     
  6. Design Review for Commercial Construction
    Also under consideration are Zoning Ordinance amendments which would provide for Design Review of commercial property. This first came to a work joint work session with the Planning Commission in January, 1998. Based on that discussion, I proposed an alternative approach to design review which would exempt new construction and alterations with a market value less than $10,000, and would use a point system to score applications. The latter feature would, I hope, reduce the discretionary factor in evaluating applications. Update(7/98): Council held a work session on Commercial Design Review in May, and councilors agreed to submit written suggestions for revision prior to reconsideration at a work session following the August 10 Council meeting.Update(8/98): The Council work session was not held due to the length of the August 10 meeting. Council did, however, receive a staff report and some comments from Councilor Fuiten. Staff supports the original form of the ordinance which gives them extremely wide latitude in reviewing applications. I oppose the broad discretion which this provides, and still support a more narrowly prescriptive approach to design review whereby applicants know what and how much is expected of them. The staff report also contains an interesting table of recent developments in Forest Grove showing square footage and values.
     
  7. Tree Protection Ordinance
    Council adopted a newly revised tree protection ordinance in May. The new ordinance protects trees under several categories: street trees, trees on land being developed, trees that have received protection during site review (commercial and apartment property only), and trees on a "register" of significant trees, a list which is yet to be adopted. The ordinance provides for permits for removal or "major pruning" and penalties / mitigation measures.
     
  8. Libraries
    As the Council liaison to the FG Library Commission and the Washington County Co-operative Library Advisory Board (CLAB), these are some of the current library issues:
    • The County recently imposed a $60 per year fee for out-of-county residents for a WCCLS library card. Member libraries had been issuing library cards to out-of-county residents without county-wide guidelines, but as of July 1, the fee will be imposed for these. Member libraries have some flexibility in applying the new fee, however. In Forest Grove, the fee will go into effect on Sept. 1 to allow time to notify effected patrons. The fee does not apply to residents of Multnomah or Clackamas counties which have reciprocal agreements with WCCLS, and where WCCLS cards are honored.
    • Treat your library card like a credit card! In a recent case, a local patron lost their card at Safeway, but did not report its loss. Someone then used that card to check out several hundred dollars worth of videos which have never been returned. The card holder is responsible for all materials checked out on the card, unless it is reported stolen or lost (check the fine print on your card).
    • CLAB is reconsidering the county-wide capital construction bond levy that was dropped in light of the passage of Measure 47. With the adoption of Measure 50, there is renewed optimism about such a levy for library expansion. This will be on the October agenda for further discussion. Update: Since Tigard has dropped out of participating in the measure, and since the county will not put the measure on the ballot unless all WCCLS member public libraries participate, this option appears to be dead. Since 45% of the circulation of the FG Library goes to non-residents of Forest Grove, it doesn't seem fair to expect residents to absorb all of the costs of expansion. One alternative would be to form a "service district" for some portion of western Washington County, possibly including Cornelius, Banks, Gaston, and/or Hillsboro to fund library expansion. This is the approach that Beaverton will be pursuing. Update(7/98): Beaverton has dropped their proposal for a service district and will seek a local option levy in the fall. The City of Hillsboro has expressed opposition to the idea, so no special construction districts are likely in the near future. For Forest Grove by itself, or in cooperation with Cornelius, the additional revenue from an extended service district would probably not warrant the effort of forming one. Forest Grove will likely ask voters for a "local-option" levy in the fall to rehabilitate the thirty year-old aquatic center, purchase major additional park land north of the High School, and expand the library. I will ask Council to support two resolutions asking for a restructuring of the tax system at the same time.
    • Also as a result of Measure 50, the three-year operating levy for WCCLS becomes a part of Washington County's permanent tax base. This has some good and not-so-good points, but longer term stability is one advantage. For Forest Grove, about 80% of operating funds come from WCCLS. The other 20% come from the City's general fund, which is not so secure. Under recent advisories from the state revenue office, the City's general fund could lose as much as $460,000 from its just adopted budget. Update(1/98): The county will begin consideration in January of how to handle their Measure 47/50 cutbacks. Two options seem to be most likely at this point. Option A would cut back all areas equally "across the board." Option B would stretch out the MSTIP (Major Street Improvements) program over several more years than the original plan, cut back more drastically on the general fund, and fund WCCLS at its originally budgeted amount. Update(7/98): The County has formally adopted the latter approach (Option B) which, for the time being, assures WCCLS of its "status quo" budget.
    • A subcommittee of the Cooperative Library Advisory Board is currently (7/98) considering alternatives for allocating WCCLS funds among the member libraries. The current system relies almost exclusively on relative circulation figures for the allocation. That may not be the best system to use, since it doesn't take into account non-circulation library functions.
       
  9. Forest Grove Budget Woes
    The worst seems to have come to pass for the city: the budget committee will convene in January to address how to carry on in light of the $400,000 shortfall. Update (7/98): With the failure of the voters to pass a repeal of the double majority requirement at the May primary election, Forest Grove will not be able to collect the local option serial levy for operating expenses that the voters approved at the same election (there was only about a 35% voter turnout). The City will likely try for this again at the November general election where a double majority is not required.

Let me know what you think!

These are just a few current issues, but I'd love to hear your response to these or any other issue facing Council, so send me mail or use this form for your comments:

I would greatly appreciate any comments you may have (good or bad) about this statement. I hope you'll take a moment after reading this to use this form to send me your comments. Thank you! Your name:

Your email address:

Your comments:

Return to Home Page