Events > Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors
Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors
Board of Directors
Date: Mon March 02, 2009
9:00 AM - 11:00 AM
Contact: A Regular Meeting of the Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District Board of Directors was held at the HMT Recreation Complex, Peg Ogilbee Dryland Training Center, 15707 SW Walker Road, Beaverton, on Monday, March 2, 2009, at 7:00 p.m.
Present: Larry Pelatt President/Director
Bob Scott Secretary/Director
William Kanable (via telephone) Secretary Pro-Tempore/Director
John Griffiths Director
Doug Menke General Manager
Absent: Joseph Blowers Director
Agenda Item #1 – Call Regular Meeting to Order President, Larry Pelatt, called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Agenda Item #2 – Audience Time There was no testimony during Audience Time.Agenda Item #3 – Board Time There were no comments during Board Time.Agenda Item #4 – Consent Agenda
Bob Scott moved the Board of Directors approve Consent Agenda items (A) Minutes of February 2, 2009 Regular Meeting, (B) Monthly Bills, (C) Monthly Financial Statement, (D) Tualatin Hills Nature Park Advisory Committee Members, (E) Resolution Authorizing Application for Local Government Grant Program, (F) Short-form Investment Policy per ORS 294.135, and (G) Sunset Swim Center Air Circulation Tunnel Repair Contract. John Griffiths seconded the motion. Roll call proceeded as follows:
Bill Kanable Yes
John Griffiths Yes
Bob Scott Yes
Larry Pelatt Yes
The motion was UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.Agenda Item #5 – Unfinished Business
A. Resolution Amending Establishment of the Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee Doug Menke, General Manager, provided a brief overview of the memo included within the Board of Directors information packet, noting that at the February 2, 2009 Regular Board meeting, the Board of Directors discussed appointment of the Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee and expressed an interest in increasing the maximum size of the Committee authorized by the resolution establishing the Committee adopted by the Board at the December 8, 2008 Regular Board meeting. An amended resolution is being presented to the Board for consideration this evening to increase the Committee size to a maximum of twelve members, as well as adjusting the Committee member terms to six one-year terms and six two-year terms, and creating three ex-officio members of the Committee. Doug offered to answer any questions the Board of Directors may have.
Bob Scott moved the Board of Directors approve the resolution to amend the establishment of the THPRD Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee. John Griffiths seconded the motion. Roll call proceeded as follows:
Bill Kanable Yes
John Griffiths Yes
Bob Scott Yes
Larry Pelatt Yes
The motion was UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.B. Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee Members Doug Menke, General Manager, noted that the Park District received 27 applications requesting appointment to the Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee. At the January 12, 2009 Regular Board meeting, Board members Joe Blowers and Bill Kanable agreed to serve on a screening committee to review the applications to recommend the top candidates to fill the Committee and at the February 2, 2009 Regular Board meeting, Joe and Bill provided an update to the full Board as to their review process. In addition, staff requested, and the Board approved, appointment of three ex-officio members to the Committee: Keith Hobson, Director of Business & Facilities, Hal Bergsma, Director of Planning, and one Board member (to be determined). Doug noted that the action requested from the Board this evening is appointment of the Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee, noting which appointees are selected to receive one or two-year terms, as well as the designation of one Board member to serve as an ex-officio member.
A handout was provided to the Board listing the preferred applicants for appointment as discussed by the Board during the February 2, 2009 Regular Board meeting as follows:
Marc San Soucie
A copy of the list was entered into the record.
President, Larry Pelatt, asked how the Board would prefer to assign terms for the proposed Committee members.
Doug noted that Ken Boire had expressed an interest in a one-year term.
Bill Kanable suggested to simply split the list in half and assign the term limits accordingly.
Bob Scott expressed agreement with this suggestion.
John Griffiths suggested assigning the first six applicants listed on the handout as two-year terms and that the last six applicants listed be assigned one-year terms.
The Board expressed agreement with this suggestion.
Bob Scott volunteered to serve as the Board member ex-officio member to the Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee.
Bob Scott moved the Board of Directors appoint the Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee, noting the first six applicants listed as two-year terms and the second six applicants listed as one-year terms and, in addition, the designation of Bob Scott to serve as the ex-officio member.Discussion followed:
John noted that Spence Benfield is in attendance this evening and asked what term he would prefer.
Spence replied that either term is acceptable.
Larry asked whether the motion should list the applicants by name.
Doug confirmed this.
Bob Scott amended his motion to state that the Board of Directors appoint the Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee, the following people for two-year terms: Rob Massar, Marc San Soucie, Barbara Wilson, Dan Plaza, Deanna Mueller-Crispin, and Fred Meyer and for one-year terms: Lauren Danahy, Spence Benfield, Winslow Brooks, Brett Hayes, Ken Boire, and Paul Waldram. In addition, designate Bob Scott as the Board member to serve as an ex-officio member and two staff members as determined by the General Manager. John Griffiths seconded the motion. Roll call proceeded as follows:
Bill Kanable Yes
John Griffiths Yes
Bob Scott Yes
Larry Pelatt Yes
The motion was UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.C. 2008 Bond Measure Doug Menke, General Manager, introduced Keith Hobson, Director of Business & Facilities, Bob Wayt, Director of Communications & Development, and Hal Bergsma, Director of Planning, to provide an overview of the memo included within the Board of Directors information packet.
Keith Hobson, Director of Business & Facilities, provided a detailed overview of the memo section regarding the Bond Debt Repayment Structure, noting that at the February 2, 2009 Regular Board meeting, staff discussed options for the debt repayment structure given a projected interest rate that results in a lower than anticipated tax rate on the bond levy. The two options discussed were applying the savings to lower the tax rate versus applying the savings to shortening the debt repayment term. He noted that based on the results of an analysis by the Park District’s financial advisors, Seattle NW, staff recommends applying the interest savings to lower the bond levy tax rate, noting that given the current economic conditions, staff believes that keeping the tax rate lower in the near future should be a higher priority than retiring the debt early at some point in the future.
It was the consensus of the Board of Directors to accept the staff recommendation of option 1, applying the interest savings to lower the bond levy tax rate, as noted within the Board of Directors information packet.
Keith introduced Javier Fernandez, Vice-President of Seattle NW, who provided a detailed overview of the current market for issuing the bonds and the status of the bond issuance process via a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which was entered into the record. Javier offered to answer any questions the Board of Directors may have.
John Griffiths asked what risks are associated with deflation.
Javier replied that deflation indicates a lack of productivity. With deflation, as prices go down, companies are not able to recoup the cost of producing those goods, which in turn shrinks the economy.
John asked whether the Park District has a window in which to issue the bonds if interest rates spike.
Keith replied that if interest rates rise to the point of exceeding the tax projected with the bond materials, the Park District would need to make a choice of whether to go ahead with the issuance knowing that it is going to exceed the projections or wait. Staff’s hope is that the Park District is still within a window of opportunity, barring a major upswing, for an issuance that meets the tax rate obligations.
Bob Scott asked whether there should be concern with splitting the issue into two pieces.
Keith replied that there is no choice, as the Park District could not realistically expend the entire bond amount in three years. In addition, there will be some flexibility as to when the second issue is issued. A concern is that if the Park District decides to hold on the first issuance, that could delay the start of the bond projects for two to three years while the market recovers.
Larry Pelatt asked if there has been any correlation drawn between times similar to today when the stock market has been highly volatile in relation to when the bond market will settle back down and begin to recover.
Javier described how any correlation is incredibly difficult even in normal markets, let alone a market such as the current.
Keith noted that another option as noted within the resolution is that if the competitive sale does not yield bids that will meet the criteria, the Park District has the option to attempt to go through a negotiated sale.
Bob Wayt, Director of Communications & Development, provided a brief overview of the memo section regarding the Bond Program Communications Plan, noting that a plan has been developed and that the primary tool used will be the Park District website as it is flexible and can be updated quickly at little, if any, cost. Staff will also use Park District publications, presentations to key community groups at milestone dates, on-site displays and signage, special mailings, proactive work with the news media, and other tools. Bob offered to answer any questions the Board may have.
Hearing none, Bob introduced Hal to continue the staff report.
Hal Bergsma, Director of Planning, provided a detailed overview of the memo section regarding the Park District’s design process, noting that with the passage of the bond measure, numerous park, trail and facility designs will need to be prepared and adopted, including plans for six new and five redeveloped neighborhood parks, one new and two redeveloped community parks, seven new trail/linear parks, and four building expansions. The design processes needed for these projects are scheduled to occur within the next four years, with most to occur within the next two years. Due to this significant increase in park design, staff is proposing a new approach that would expedite the process while assuring adequate public and Board involvement. Hal provided a detailed overview of the process as described within the memo, noting that staff is requesting Board consensus on the process as outlined, and offered to answer any questions the Board may have.
Bob Scott asked how “substantial change” would be defined as noted within the memo.
Doug provided an example of siting an athletic field with lights, noting that if there is public controversy about the field being lit, the issue would be brought to the Board.
Hal noted that a design change that would result in bringing additional traffic to a facility would also be considered substantial.
Larry commented that the proposal is viable at this time due to the positive relationship between the Board and staff and expressed concern that if at some point in the future, that relationship is not as healthy, that the Board may have lost some amount of control.
Doug replied that if at any point the Board is concerned that staff is moving to fast, it is only a matter of open communication and the process can be slowed down. Staff’s intent is to do a very good job on the front end of the planning process so there are less issues down the road. There would inevitably be trigger points where a plan designed in the bond program is not agreeable to particular neighborhoods, which it would then be brought back before the Board for clarification.
Larry noted that if the public is involved throughout the entire process, there should not be many such cases.
It was the consensus of the Board to move forward with the design process as outlined.D. Resolution Regarding A&E Consultants of Record and Transfer of Authority for Bond Projects Steve Gulgren, Superintendent of Planning & Development, provided a detailed overview of the memo included within the Board of Directors information packet, noting that staff is requesting Board approval of a Consultants of Record roster pre-qualifying Architectural and Engineering (A&E) Professional Service Teams for entering into professional service contracts over time for multiple Bond Program projects. In addition, staff is requesting approval of the resolution transferring authority for A&E contracts to the General Manager. Steve described the extensive review and scoring process of the 110 proposals received in response to the Request for Proposals, noting that the result is a roster of project teams in five categories as included within the Board of Directors information packet. Steve noted that the roster, as well as the transfer of authority for awarding consultant contracts, will reduce project times, and offered to answer any questions the Board may have.
President, Larry Pelatt, asked if the transfer of authority being requested is intended for bond projects only or on a continuing basis for all projects.
Doug Menke, General Manager, replied that the resolution is tied to the anticipated bond funded improvements. In addition, System Development Charge funds and other funds are so limited at this point that there would not be an A&E contract of over $100,000 anytime soon.
Keith Hobson, Director of Business & Facilities, confirmed that the resolution does restrict the authorization only to the A&E contractors that are on the preapproved list and that the A&E contractors are specific to the bond projects.
Larry asked for confirmation that this transfer authority would not pertain to SDC projects.
Doug confirmed this, noting that it is specific to bond projects.
Bob Scott asked if there was any consideration given to putting a cap on the transfer authority.
Doug replied that the transfer authority could be capped if that is the desire of the Board.
Bob expressed concern that there is no upper limit, noting that the larger projects would not be moving very quickly anyway.
Larry noted that the larger projects would be in front of the Board often via the review process and he believes the Board would have as many opportunities for involvement as it desires.
Doug noted that the transfer authority is only for selecting the consultants that will do the master planning process. Using the Conestoga Recreation & Aquatic Center building expansion as an example of a large project, the A&E contract will be approximately 20% of the total $5 million budget for that project.
Steve noted that for large projects such as Conestoga, staff will go through an extra screening process for the A&E consultants as detailed within the memo.
Larry stated that it is important to keep in mind that just because there is a prequalified list does not limit the Park District to using only those firms on the list.
Bob agreed, noting that there probably would not be too much of a differential between the $100,000 floor and any cap the Board determined.
John Griffiths asked how much is anticipated to be spent on A&E contracts throughout the bond program.
Doug replied that it would be approximately 15-20% of the entire bond program, excluding the land acquisition funds and administrative fees.
Larry noted that it would be approximately 15-20% of $60 million, so approximately $12 million.
John asked whether this includes general contracting as well.
Doug replied no, A&E only. The construction contracts will come back to the Board for approval.
John asked what the biggest project will be.
Doug replied that it will depend on how the other projects are packaged, but will probably be Conestoga.
Steve replied that there would be four or five projects with total project budgets of between $4-5 million.
John asked for confirmation that $12 million of the bond measure could be awarded without the Board seeing the contracts.
Doug confirmed this, noting for consultant work only.
Bill Kanable commented that he could agree with the transfer authority as long as the Board received information as the contracts are being awarded so that the Board could review and comment on the information.
John asked how many A&E contracts are expected for the entire bond program.
Steve replied that it would depend on how the projects are packaged.
John asked how the project timeline would be affected if the Board were to review all of the A&E contracts rather than adopting the transfer authority.
Doug replied that it would most likely delay the projects a few months.
Larry expressed agreement, noting that the Board only meets once per month and that any questions that require further research could delay the project even longer.
John asked how the Board would be kept informed as to the contracts being awarded.
Doug replied that staff could provide a schedule of what contracts staff is anticipating awarding and if the Board wishes to review one or more of those contracts in detail, it is the Board’s right to do so.
John expressed agreement with this suggestion, noting that he would like to see a forecast of the contracts proposed for award from which the Board could select specific contracts to review, but otherwise staff could move forward.
Bob and Bill expressed agreement with this suggestion.
Bob asked whether other agencies have used a pre-qualification process.
Steve confirmed this, noting that it was modeled from another agency’s process.
Doug noted that Vancouver Parks & Recreation followed this process as well. He noted that the RFP review process was substantial and an open and public process.
Bob Scott moved the Board of Directors approve the recommended Consultants of Record roster as depicted on the scoring sheets for each of the five Bond Program categories as advertised in the Consultants of Record/Request for Proposals and approve Resolution 2009-05 authorizing the General Manager to award certain contracts without further Board approval, but providing the Board with an advanced listing of upcoming contracts for review.John Griffiths requested that “with the Board able to call out a contract for further review by the Board” be added to the end of the motion on the floor.Bob Scott agreed to the amendment. John Griffiths seconded the amended motion. Roll call proceeded as follows:
Bill Kanable Yes
John Griffiths Yes
Bob Scott Yes
Larry Pelatt Yes
The motion was UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.D. General Manager’s Report Doug Menke, General Manager, provided a detailed overview of the General Manager’s Report included within the Board of Directors information packet, which included the following topics:
Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program Grant
Connecting Green Alliance
Elsie Stuhr Center’s 34th Birthday
No Child Left Inside Legislation
Doug offered to answer any questions the Board of Directors may have regarding the General Manager’s Report.
John Griffiths asked for an update regarding any efforts the Park District has made seeking federal stimulus funding.
Doug replied that Washington County Commissioner Dick Schouten has been helpful to the Park District as he has contacts with several critical committees. The Park District is currently on the 150% funding list for one of Metro’s reviews and Commissioner Schouten is also working with another group to see if there is any consideration for slowing the process as there appears to be limited equity on the westside in terms of funding. The hope is that there would be more balance across the greater metro area if additional review were to occur.
Agenda Item #6 – New Business
A. Cooper Mountain Nature Park Intergovernmental Agreement Jim McElhinny, Director of Park & Recreational Services, introduced Bruce Barbarasch, Superintendent of Natural Resources & Trails Management, and Terry Dresler, Director of Parks & Environmental Services for Metro, to provide an overview of the memo included within the Board of Directors information packet regarding a proposed Intergovernmental Agreement with Metro for the operation of Cooper Mountain Nature Park, a 230-acre natural area purchased by Metro using 1995 bond measure funds.
Bruce provided a detailed overview of the Cooper Mountain Nature Park Intergovernmental Agreement, including the Concept Plan for the site, via a PowerPoint presentation. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation was entered into the record. Bruce noted that the action requested of the Board of Directors this evening is approval of the Cooper Mountain Nature Park Intergovernmental Agreement, including hiring of the positions referenced, and direction to the General Manager, or his designee, to execute the agreement. Bruce offered to answer any questions the Board may have.
John Griffiths asked for the status of the privately owned properties that are now surrounded by the Cooper Mountain Nature Park as well as properties to the south.
Terry replied that the properties pose challenges to completing some of the trails and that there is still interest in acquiring the properties, but little progress has been made.
John asked how the signage is going to indicate management of the property.
Bruce replied that the signage will have both logos.
Bob Scott asked whether the Park District could change the budget for the site if necessary at the end of the five-year reimbursement period.
Terry confirmed this, noting that a 3% inflator has been included for each year. She stated that this is a true partnership and Metro is open to discussing and possibly adjusting the budget if there are any unforeseen cost increases.
Bruce noted that Park District staff is planning to meet with Metro staff many times over the five-year period to discuss how things are going.
Larry Pelatt asked what the anticipated outcome is after the initial 10-year agreement.
Terry replied that it is Metro’s desire that the Park District would want to extend the contract and continue operations for the site.
John asked what would happen when the Park District’s boundaries move to encompass the entire property.
Doug Menke, General Manager, replied that not much would change. At the end of five years, the Cooper Mountain Nature Park would become the Park District’s financial responsibility and there is verbiage within the IGA that Metro would be supportive of a future Urban Growth Boundary process and annexation potential. He noted that the entire Cooper Mountain Nature Park property has been annexed to the Park District.
John asked if there has been any feedback from the neighborhood regarding the park.
Bruce replied that there has been a variety of opinions and that the public design process attempted to take that into account. Some neighbors are concerned about increased traffic, noise and crowds and the process has been sensitive to that. Instead of a large grand opening celebration, a series of relatively small events throughout the summer are planned that should appeal to a variety of people. Having a full time Park Ranger onsite will also help build a relationship with the neighbors.
Terry agreed that one of the main concerns heard was regarding a large influx of traffic so the design attempts to keep that in consideration and mitigate the issue.
John asked whether dogs would be allowed in the park.
Terry replied that they would not be.
Bruce replied that generally all of the rules that exist at the Tualatin Hills Nature Park would apply at the Cooper Mountain Nature Park as well.
Doug commended Bruce and Terry for their efforts in this process, noting that it has been a great partnership with a lot of collaboration and a unique opportunity to have a significant asset in that area of the Park District.
Bob Scott moved the Board of Directors approve the Cooper Mountain Nature Park Intergovernmental Agreement, including hiring of the positions referenced, and direction to the General Manager or his designee to execute the agreement. John Griffiths seconded the amended motion. Roll call proceeded as follows:
Bill Kanable Yes
John Griffiths Yes
Bob Scott Yes
Larry Pelatt Yes
The motion was UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.Agenda Item #7 - Adjourn There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
Larry Pelatt, President Bob Scott, Secretary
HMT Recreation Complex, Dryland Training Center - 7pm
15707 SW Walker Road
Beaverton, OR 97006
Call Regular Meeting to Order
Approve: Minutes of February 2, 2009 Regular Meeting
Approve: Monthly Bills
Approve: Monthly Financial Statement
Appoint: Tualatin Hills Nature Park Advisory Committee Members
Approve: Resolution Authorizing Application for Local Government Grant Program
Adopt: Short-form Investment Policy per ORS 294.135
Award: Sunset Swim Center Air Circulation Tunnel Repair Contract
Approve: Resolution Amending the Establishment of the Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee
Appoint: Parks Bond Citizen Oversight Committee Members
Update: 2008 Bond Measure
Approve: Resolution Regarding A&E Consultants of Record and Transfer of Authority for Bond Projects
Information: General Manager’s Report
Approve: Cooper Mountain Nature Park Intergovernmental Agreement
*Executive Session: Executive Sessions are permitted under the authority of ORS 192.660. Copies of the statute are available at the offices of Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District.
** Audience Time: If you wish to be heard on an item not on the agenda you may be heard under Audience Time with a 3-minute time limit. If you wish to speak on an agenda item, please wait until it is before the Board. Note: Agenda items may not be considered in the order listed.
***Consent Agenda: Consent Agenda items will be approved without discussion unless there is a request to discuss a particular consent agenda item. The issue separately discussed will be voted on separately. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), this material, in an alternate format, or special accommodations for the meeting, will be made available by calling 503-645-6433 at least two business days prior to the meeting.