METRO POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING RECORD

February 27, 2002 – 5:00 p.m.

Metro Regional Center, Council Chambers

(as amended on March 13, 2002)

Committee Members Present: Chair Michael Jordan, Vice Chair Tom Hughes, Charles Becker, Paul Curcio, Nathalie Darcy, Rob Drake, Bernie Giusto, Eugene Grant, Ed Gronke, John Hartsock, Vera Katz, Richard Kidd, Mark Knudsen, Annette Mattson, Doug Neeley, David Ripma, Dan Saltzman, Jim Zehren

Alternates Present: Meg Fernekees, Jim Griffith, Dave Lohman

Also Present: Hal Bergsma, City of Beaverton; Ron Bunch, City of Gresham; Al Burns, City of Portland; Cindy Catto, AGC; Greg Chew, Parsons Brinkerhoff; Valerie Counts, City of Hillsboro; Tom Coffee, Consultant; Michael Dennis, Tri-Met; Kay Durtschi, MCCI; Shelby Edwards, Leland Consulting Group; Matt Grumm, City of Portland; Jim Hinman, DLCD; Holly Iburg, Newland Communities; Jim Jacks, City of Tualatin; Gregory Jenks, Clackamas County; Gil Kelley, City of Portland; Stephan Lashbrook, City of Lake Oswego; Doug McClain, Clackamas County; Mike McFarland, Clackamas County Citizen; Jon Mandaville, Washington County; Irene Marvich, League of Women Voters; Michael Ogan, Portland Development Commission; Pat Ribellia, City of Hillsboro; Richard Ross, City of Gresham; Matthew Udziela, Cogan Owens Cogan

Metro Elected Officials Present: Liaisons – Carl Hosticka, Presiding Officer; Rod Park, Metro Council District 1; Susan McLain, Metro Council District 4. Also present: Bill Atherton, Metro Council District 2

Metro Staff Present: Dick Benner, Brenda Bernards, Dan Cooper, Andy Cotugno, Suzanne Myers Harold, Mike Hoglund, Marci LaBerge, Michael Morrissey, Lydia Neill, Mark Turpel

1.  INTRODUCTIONS

Chair Jordan called the meeting to order at 5:08 p.m. Those present introduced themselves. Chair Jordan welcomed Mayor Griffith to MPAC.

2.  ANNOUNCEMENTS

There were none.

3.  CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS

There were none.

4.  CONSENT AGENDA

4.1  Meeting minutes for February 13, 2002

4.2  Appointment of MTAC members

5.  COUNCIL UPDATE

Presiding Officer Hosticka said Metro has received a number of requests for exceptions to the Functional Plan, particularly the Table 1 numbers. There are a couple of proposals under consideration for how to handle the request. He asked for direction from MPAC.

Mr. Cooper reviewed the proposed options for handling missed housing and employment targets. Option 1 is a detailed, eight-step process that would determine the capacity of each local government. First Metro would determine which governments have not completed their work, then determine what the 24 cities and three counties have reported, add in the capacity numbers from the urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion, and determine which jurisdictions receive the additional capacity. If the previous steps bring a local government to within 99% of its target, it would be deemed in substantial compliance. Then Table 1 numbers would be lowered for governments whose original targets were based on error or insufficient analysis. If a surplus remained after completing these steps, exceptions would be granted under Title 8 to governments that made a good faith effort, and remaining governments would be sent to MPAC under the dispute resolution process. Under Option 2, Metro would determine the total housing and employment capacities using the reported capacity from the 24 cities and three counties. Those governments that have not completed the analysis would be left at their existing targets. The additional capacity from the UGB expansion would then be added to the appropriate governments, and Table 1 numbers would be amended to reconcile the targets.

Chair Jordan referred the item to the Metro Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC).

Presiding Officer Hosticka said the Council Natural Resources Committee has finished the inventory phase of the fish and wildlife habitat protection program, and staff will now begin the upland habitat portion of the program. The committee also looked at the first draft of the scope of work for the economic, social, energy and environmental (ESEE) analysis; he asked for comments.

Chair Jordan recommended notifying local jurisdictions that the Council is soliciting comments on the ESEE analysis.

Mr. Cotugno clarified that the Natural Resources Committee discussed the approach to get the uplands habitat portion on track with the riparian portion. Later staff will show MPAC and the Council the wildlife mapping and adopt the conclusion as to what is regional and significant.

6.  SUBCOMMITTEE UPDATES

Mr. Zehren said staff is currently gathering data for the Parks Subcommittee, which will meet again on March 13.

Mr. Lohman emphasized that the Jobs Subcommittee has created “straw man” concepts for discussion. The scenarios do not reflect personal or group consensus.

Mr. Cotugno said a draft of the economic forecast should be finished by the next MPAC meeting on March 13, and the Economic Forecast Subcommittee should begin meeting on March 27. He expected the first draft of the housing needs analysis to be available in April, and the Housing Subcommittee to begin meeting after that.

7.  SUB-REGIONAL ISSUES – PROPOSED METHODOLOGY

Mr. Cotugno reviewed the February 20, memo from himself to Councilor Park regarding policy analysis of subregional issues and the Subregional Assessment Paper. Both documents are included in the meeting packet.

Chair Jordan said at the last Subregional Subcommittee meeting, he realized that the 2040 design framework could be used as the framework for subregional analysis. If Metro makes policy decisions based on a regional analysis, and if those decisions create a critical disparity in any particular area of the region, shouldn’t that be a concern? He noted that after the analysis has been done, it may be that there is no disparity great enough to be addressed with the land use system.

Councilor Park asked about the timeline restraints in order to make a decision on the urban growth boundary (UGB) by December 2, 2002.

Mr. Cotugno said August 1, is the deadline for the Executive Officer’s recommendation to the Metro Council, so that there is adequate time to go through the decision process and receive input from MPAC and the public by the end of the year. Metro hopes to get feedback from the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) at the Commission’s meeting in April, to allow time to do the subregional analysis before August 1. In order to be placed on the April LCDC agenda, the item needs to be forwarded to LCDC from Metro now.

Mr. Zehren asked about the primary focus of the performance measures. Is it the economy, transportation or affordable housing?

Chair Jordan said the Subregional Subcommittee identified a list of indicators on pages B-7 through B-9, that included transportation, affordable housing and the economy.

Mayor Katz said it makes more sense to first answer the question of whether subregional disparities can be addressed with the land use system, before beginning the subregional analysis. MPAC can already identify subregional disparities; it is not necessary to perform the analysis first. MPAC needs to know what Metro plans to do with the results, should the analysis determine that there are disparities in a variety of subregions.

Commissioner Saltzman expressed concern that MPAC was being asked to make a recommendation tonight. It has been the practice of MPAC to not take action the first time an item is presented.

Mayor Hughes said the Subregional Subcommittee asked the following question: if the Framework Plan impedes the creation of livable communities in some areas, then they should figure out why that is, and which disparities between centers are caused by land use and UGB decisions.

Councilor McLain said Metro does not want to spend money on a detailed analysis until LCDC has commented on the subregional methodology. The question before MPAC tonight is, can Metro go forward in baby steps to determine if there is even something that Metro can do?

Chair Jordan acknowledged Commissioner Saltzman’s concern about taking action today. He asked Mr. Curcio if there would be time to place the item on the LCDC April agenda, should MPAC delay action until March 13.

Mr. Curcio said it depended on a number of factors, including what type of action Metro is requesting from the Commission. He could not answer Chair Jordan’s question today, but he could get back to the committee.

Mr. Cooper said the Council has asked legal counsel to prepare a request for a declaratory ruling from the Commission, which would ask them to answer specific questions as to whether specific actions would be consistent with Goal 14. The Commission’s answer may require opinions from the Attorney General on the interpretation of state statutes.

Chair Jordan said it seemed unlikely that the Commission would make its decision in April. Instead it would likely take the matter under advisement.

Mr. Cooper said if the process for a declaratory ruling does not begin in April, then the Commission cannot begin until its next meeting in June. The ideal time frame would be to receive a ruling from the Commission in June.

Presiding Officer Hosticka said the Council may consider a resolution next week authorizing the request to LCDC for a declaratory ruling.

Mr. Benner said first LCDC will decide whether or not to make a ruling. If Metro submits the request by March 14, it would be reasonable for LCDC to decide in April whether it will make a ruling. If the Commissioner decides to make a ruling, then it will have to decide which procedure to follow, which would take more time.

Mr. Lohman said he supports MPAC’s principle of not deciding policy the first time an issue arises. However in this case, MPAC is not deciding whether it wants to use subregional methodology, it is trying to find out if it is possible to do so. He questioned whether MPAC needs to wait until March 13, to make its decision.

Commissioner Saltzman said the motion is billed as a recommendation to the Metro Council and it did not appear that anything would be lost by waiting.

Chair Jordan said he was inclined not to violate MPAC’s standing procedure, if a delay would not affect the timeline.

Presiding Officer Hosticka asked if MPAC would prefer the Council to wait until March 14, to decide whether to ask LCDC to guidance.

Chair Jordan said yes, he would prefer that the Council wait.

Mayor Drake said in a situation like this, MPAC is not making a final policy decision, but rather putting the vehicle in place to ask the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) and LCDC whether subregional analysis is feasible. He said he is comfortable moving forward on the item today, so that Council can receive an answer from LCDC by the end of summer and begin making policy decisions.

Chair Jordan asked members if they were ready to make a decision today. The majority of the members said yes.

Councilor Ripma said the main issue with the state is the use of subregional analysis to expand the UGB in ways that otherwise would not be allowed, to meet subregional needs. In his opinion, subregional needs can be met without expanding the UGB outside the tiers established now. Sending the proposed request to LCDC says that Metro wants to use the subregional approach to expand the UGB. In his opinion that is a debatable point which MPAC should address. He would prefer to wait until the next meeting to make a recommendation.

Chair Jordan said there will be an opportunity to have that debate in the future.

Mr. Zehren asked if there will be an opportunity to revisit the indicators listed on pages B-7 and B-8 of the Subregional Assessment Paper before staff begins its analysis.

Chair Jordan said yes, MPAC will revisit the indicators in the future.

Mr. Zehren indicated his concern that some key indicators are not identified, such as subregional differences regarding the extent to which industrial land is being used for non-industrial purposes and the extent to which commercial development is occurring outside of regional centers and town centers. He said that unless we also measure these kinds of indicators, subregional analysis could result in more land being added to the UGB which is then developed in ways that continue land uses which are inconsistent with our 2040 Regional Growth Concept.

Mayor Hughes said MPAC is not being asked to decide whether or not subregional analysis should be used. Currently it is not known whether the state will allow the use of subregional analysis. MPAC is asking whether or not it can ask the question. He added that subregional analysis is not the only scenario that will be considered. The proposal is to add subregional analysis to the other scenarios.

Commissioner Saltzman said he still regards this as a major decision. Should LCDC determine that the subregional approach is valid, it will affect the ensuing debate between August and December.

Councilor Park said the proposal is to ask LCDC whether Metro can establish subregions based on some criteria and create borders. If LCDC says that the criteria of basing subregions around centers is valid, then Metro will run a Metroscope scenario and examine the data. The MPAC Subregional Subcommittee agreed that if the region is going to propose subregional criteria, it should be done in a way that strengthens centers.

Councilor Ripma said this is a major policy decision and should be discussed further.

Mr. Hartsock called for the question.

Mayor Katz requested a roll call vote.

2.  ANNOUNCEMENTS (CONTINUED)

Chair Jordan said the Jobs Subcommittee will meet in the Council Chamber following a brief recess.

Mr. Hartsock said a study committee has been formed to study incorporation of Damascus. The committee is considering the area from the UGB to Highway 26, and from the Clackamas County line down to the Clackamas River. About 130 people are involved, and the committee recently received a grant of $15,000. The issue will appear on the ballot in 2004.

There being no further business, Chair Jordan adjourned the meeting at 6:22 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Suzanne Myers Harold

MPAC Coordinator

ATTACHMENTS TO THE RECORD FOR FEBRUARY 27, 2002

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