MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

Tuesday, October 3, 2000

Council Chamber

Members Present:  Rod Park, Susan McLain, Rod Monroe, David Bragdon (ex officio)

Members Absent:    None

Chair Park called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. He welcomed Councilor McLain as a member of the committee. Councilor McLain replaced Councilor Ed Washington, who resigned from the committee to focus on other interests for the balance of his term.

1.  Consideration of the Minutes of the September 5, 2000, Growth Management Committee Meeting

2.  Ordinance No. 00-879, For the Purpose of Amending the Regional Framework Plan Ordinance No. 97-715B for Statewide Planning Goal Compliance of Component 1: Urban Form and, Component 2: Water Quality and Management and Flood Hazard and Declaring an Emergency

•  Regional Framework Plan Overview

Andy Cotugno, Planning Director, said Ordinance No. 00-879 would amend the Regional Framework Plan, as directed by the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) at is meeting on September 29, 2000.

Mark Turpel, Long-Range Planning Manager, reviewed Ordinance No. 00-879. A copy of his presentation includes information presented by Mr. Turpel and is included in the meeting record.

Councilor McLain asked if LCDC acknowledged Metro’s use of the Regional Water Consortium Plan.

Larry Shaw, Senior Assistant Counsel, said the Regional Water Consortium Plan was a recommendation only and might not qualify for acknowledgement.

Chair Park noted that Councilor Monroe would have to leave shortly for another meeting. If the committee was not yet ready to vote, he would ask Presiding Officer Bragdon to serve ex officio as a member of the committee.

Mr. Shaw reviewed Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 00-879, a copy of which is included in the meeting record.

Chair Park asked if the amendments would limit the number of urban reserve areas that Metro could identify. Mr. Shaw said no, there was no intent to limit Metro's ability to identify urban reserve areas.

Mr. Turpel reviewed a September 29, 2000, memo from Richard Benner, Director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development, to LCDC. A copy of the memo is included in the meeting record.

Councilor Monroe excused himself from the meeting. Presiding Officer Bragdon served ex officio as a member of the committee.

Dan Cooper, General Counsel, noted that in the document "LCDC September 29 Action," LCDC directed Metro to amend Policy 4.14 to read, ". . . protecting wetland values with sufficient buffers . . . ." He said Ordinance No. 00-879 would need to be amended to include this change.

Chair Park opened a public hearing on Ordinance No. 00-879. No one appeared to speak with regard to the ordinance. Chair Park closed the public hearing.

Chair McLain said adoption of Ordinance No. 00-879A is as important as anything the Metro Council has done to date.

Chair Park agreed it has been a long process. He applauded the staff who had been working on the Regional Framework Plan since 1997.

Chair Park will carry Ordinance No. 00-879A to full Council.

3.  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Update

David Moskowitz, Salmon Recovery Coordinator, reviewed his memo to Mike Burton, an update on additional Endangered Species Act (ESA) guidance from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). A copy of the memo includes information presented by Mr. Moskowitz and is included in the meeting record.

Presiding Officer Bragdon asked how Metro was positioned for the thirteen "limits" approved in the final 4(d) rule, and what the timetable would be.

Mr. Moskowitz said believed Metro was ready and well positioned to address limits 3, 5 and 9. He would have a better idea after staff met the next day to discuss Metro's submittal of its Title 3 work on water quality and flood management to NMFS.

Presiding Officer Bragdon asked if Mr. Moskowitz had discussed the 4(d) Rule Implementation Guidebook with local jurisdictions, and either offered them help or requested help from them.

Mr. Moskowitz said he had not done so yet.

Chair Park noted that he had already expressed his concerns on limit number nine to Mr. Cotugno.

Ken Helm, Assistant Counsel, reviewed his memo to Metro Council and Executive Officer Mike Burton, regarding NMFS 4(d) Rule Litigation. A copy of the memo includes information presented by Mr. Helm and is included in the meeting record.

Presiding Officer Bragdon asked how litigation would be adjudicated if the courts rule that NMFS does not have the authority to issue the 4(d) Rule, and local jurisdictions adopt ordinances instead.

Mr. Helm said litigation would be defended by each jurisdiction on a case-by-case basis. If a jurisdiction applied to NMFS, NMFS would review its ordinance. If NMFS declared the ordinance to be adequate protection, but later the courts found that NMFS did not have authority to do so, a citizen or developer could sue the jurisdiction. Mr. Helm cautioned, however, that these activities alone were not enough without the resulting death of a listed species.

Mr. Cooper noted two comparable cases in which jurisdictions were held liable because their regulations did not adequately protect endangered species. However, if a jurisdiction adopted regulations intended to protect habitat, based on available information, it would be harder for a third-party group to prove negligence, without a quantity of dead fish.

Mr. Moskowitz noted that a 60-day notice is required prior to a court appearance, in order to allow the sued party a chance to correct the problem.

Chair Park said he would request a discussion of Metro’s possible action on this item at a Metro Council/Executive Officer Informal Meeting. He asked Mr. Moskowitz to brief the committee on the results of tomorrow's staff meeting.

4.  Goal 14 Administrative Rule

Mr. Cotugno reviewed the document, LCDC Goal 14 Rulemaking, Metro issues, dated October 2, 2000. A copy of the document includes information presented by Mr. Cotugno and is included in the meeting record. LCDC planned to complete its revised draft by mid-October. Another LCDC work session was scheduled for the end of October. There would be a hearing at the end of November, and adoption was tentatively scheduled for December 15, 2000.

Chair Park said developing potential criteria for identifying subregions outside of the Metro region might alleviate LCDC's concerns. It could also be used to begin a discussion on performance standards.

Councilor McLain said hoped that the language in Goal 14 would support good regional and town centers.

Mr. Cotugno agreed. He said staff was wrestling with what should be mandated versus what should be recommended good practice on mixed used centers.

Councilor Bragdon asked if Goal 14 included language to the effect that there were other ways to fix these problems besides adding more land to urban growth boundaries.

Mr. Cotugno said the structure of the Goal 14 Rule was to 1) determine the need through a growth forecast, 2) determine if the need could be accommodated by the current urban growth boundary and comprehensive plans, 3) determine the shortfall, and 4) determine if changing comprehensive plans within the current urban growth boundary could accommodate the shortfall.

Councilor Bragdon asked if those steps applied on a subregional basis. Mr. Cotugno said yes.

5.  Performance Measures Update

Gerry Uba, Program Supervisor, Growth Management Services, reviewed his memo, Performance Measures Program Update. A copy of the memo includes information presented by Mr. Uba and is included in the meeting record.

Councilor McLain said she hopes the committee will review its past work on performance measures, to ensure that the measures are not oversimplified. She distributed copies of Resolution No. 99-2859 and a diagram of the Regional Framework Plan Structure, copies of which are included in the meeting record.

Presiding Officer Bragdon cautioned against relying too heavily on advice from the Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC). While the methodology is a technical matter, performance measures are really a policy matter. He said the performance measures need to somehow reflect national and international factors that affect the region, and compare the Metro region to other parts of the country.

Mr. Uba said the policy element is key. Staff's intent is to complete the technical exercise with MTAC's assistance, and then bring the results to Council and the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) to determine what corrective actions are necessary. He said the effect of national and international trends will be reflected in the performance measures, as much as possible.

Chair Park said the performance measures should try to reflect the effect of state and regional government on the region's general population. For example, what kinds of jobs are created, and who is able to fill them?

Councilor McLain noted that the measurements that are easy to calculate are often not the measurements that best reflect whether the 2040 Growth Concept is successful.

Mr. Uba said staff will work to develop good performance measures, and then find ways to collect the necessary data. He noted that the 2040 Growth Concept is only three years old, and it is too early to determine whether parts of it have been a success or failure.

Mr. Cotugno said his responsibility as director is to determine which performance measures warrant staff research and time. He said he is sensitive to the Council's concern that the performance measures analyze valuable data.

Presiding Officer Bragdon said they needed to somehow find a way to include qualitative measurements.

6.  Councilor Communications

Michael Morrissey, Senior Council Analyst, noted that at the last meeting, the committee directed staff to adjust the application process for annexation to Metro's jurisdictional boundary. Since then, Growth Management staff has requested, and received, clarification of the term, "Council intent to move the urban growth boundary." Mr. Morrissey said he recommended interpreting intent in a broader sense than Council adoption of a resolution of intent to move the urban growth boundary (UGB). For example, Council declaration of need, or an alternatives analysis by staff, could be interpreted as intent to move the UGB. He noted that the residents of former urban reserve 45, in Sherwood, have resubmitted their application for annexation.

There being no further business before the committee, Chair Park adjourned the meeting at 5:04 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Pat Weathers

Council Assistant

i:\minutes\2000\growth\100300gmm.doc

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 2000

The following have been included as part of the official public record: