MINUTES OF THE CITY OF HEPPNER CITY COUNCIL MEETING

HEPPNER CITY HALL, 111 N. MAIN STREET, HEPPNER, OREGON

7:00 PM, November 12, 2007

 

NOTE:  Where stated “Motion Carried” is considered unanimous, unless otherwise stated.

 

ATTENDEES:

 

Mayor, Les Paustian

City Manager, Dave DeMayo

Judy Buschke

George Koffler

Jo Ann Burleson

Kay Robinson

Cindi Doherty

 

Brian Harmon, Public Works Director

Bill Kuhn, City Attorney

Rusty Estes, Heppner Fire Department

Sgt Randy Rayburn, Morrow County Sheriff’s Department

Keith Lewis, Council member candidate

Steve Bogart, Interim City Manager Candidate

 

 

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IN ATTENDANCE:

 

Tammy Malgesini, East Oregonian

David Sykes, Heppner Gazette

Della Burch

Brett Moore, Anderson & Perry

Judy Eckman, City Treasurer

Martha Peck Andrews, Andrews Architects, Inc.

Jim Andrews, Andrews Architects, Inc.

Bob Jepsen

Kathy Turner

Donna Schonbachler

Archie Paderg

Karen Dubuque

Ed Struthers

Jerry Healy

Peggy Fishburn

 

1.  GENERAL BUSINESS

 

 

 

 

Action:  Motion by Mrs. Burleson to accept the appointment of Keith Lewis to Council Position No. 2.  Seconded by Mrs. Buschke.  Motion Carried.  

 

 

2.  COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC.  

 

 

Discussion:  Mr. De Mayo introduced Brett Moore, Project Manager, Anderson & Perry.

 

Mr. De Mayo provided background information on the Wastewater Treatment Upgrade Project.  The City is spending the funds to upgrade the present sewer plant and make needed repairs.  Mr. De Mayo and Public Works Director, Harmon, have discussed future work on the plant in 10-15 years, i.e., types of equipment that will be needed in the future, and savings for this equipment.  They have discussed how fast equipment will need to be replaced, etc., and how to operate the plant successfully for the next 20 years.  A facilities plan is required and a professional expert in the field is needed to determine the future needs for the City.  Mr. De Mayo has asked Mr. Moore to provide an outline of future requirements and services that Anderson & Perry could provide.  Mr. De Mayo stated that this will be good for the City.

 

Presentation by Mr. Moore:

 

Mr. Moore stated that Mr. De Mayo had requested that he come to Heppner and inspect the facility since there have been some issues with DEQ in meeting some of the effluent limits with respect to disinfection.  His brief inspection of the facility shows that basically, the facility is adequately sized.  However, the treatment plant is fairly old and there are some items that are not working well.  Deferred maintenance is an issue for the facility in order to keep it operating as originally intended.  This maintenance will be costly.  The City has two options:  Proceed with the deferred maintenance to bring the plant up to the capacity as designed, or step back and take a long term look at the plant since DEQ regulations are continually changing.  Any time an improvement is done, DEQ requires a facility plans process.  For the City of Heppner, Mr. Moore is not sure that this will be required if deferred maintenance is performed.  The City Council needs to make a decision on how to proceed with the facility, do they want to bring it up to current DEQ standards, or to proceed with the deferred maintenance.  There is funding available because the City has a compliance issue that is recognized by DEQ with some of the notices of non-compliance.  OECDD through their water/wastewater program has technical assistance grants of $20,000 each that they make available to communities for this.  

 

Anderson Perry has undergone some personnel changes over the last several years.  They would like to be considered for professional help with Heppner’s facility.  There is a selection process that may need to be gone through, depending on the cost of the project.  

 

The study would take 3-4 months once the information is gathered.  According to Mr. De Mayo, the proposed repairs are needed to keep the plant operational.  Mr. Harmon stated that the items that the City is borrowing the money for are to keep the plant operating.

 

Mr. Koffler asked if Mr. Moore would suggest doing a study before the $260,000 project that has been under consideration is started.  According to Mr. Moore, there are considerations on how to proceed with the deferred maintenance that would bring the plant up to its original condition.  Mr. Koffler feels that it doesn’t make sense to spend $260,000 and then do the study.  The project has been discussed by the Utilities Commission for six months and this is the first discussion they have had about obtaining a technical assistance grant.  It sounds like a smart thing to do ahead of proceeding with the repairs.

 

Mr. Paustian asked whether Mr. Moore had gone over the list; he has not.  Mr. Paustian feels that most of the items would be on Mr. Moore’s list if the study was done.  According to Mr. Moore, whoever would do the study would look at the entire facility to determine current and long-term needs.  The intent of the process is to determine that the funds are being spent properly and that planning was done appropriately.

 

Mr. Koffler asked if the planned maintenance can be deferred until summer.  According to Mr. Harmon, some of the repairs are already in process.  Mr. Paustian stated that the grinder/communitor is a very important item.  

 

Mr. Koffler suggests that we turn this issue back to the Utilities Commission; do the work that is currently in process, and postpone some of the work until they have investigated grants further.  According to Mr. Paustian, this needs to be considered.  

 

Mr. Struthers asked about water for the golf course and if there is a solution or can the golf course still use the City’s effluent?  According to Mr. Moore, DEQ has new requirements.  This should be addressed.  Mr. Moore stated that this is a DEQ problem.  This one of the items that should be addressed in the planning effort.

 

    B.  Conference call with Darlee Rex, Rex Consultants.  

 

Discussion:  Ms. Rex was unable to travel to Heppner due to road closures between Pendleton and Heppner.  She stated that she is very excited about the application for the Senior Center being funded.  This will involve a lot of work.  Mr. Paustian stated that the architect met with the residents of the center earlier today and they had several good suggestions.  According to Mr. De Mayo, the Andrews are in attendance and a list will be provided to Ms. Rex later.  

 

Mr. Koffler stated that the Council would like a brief summary of actions that will be taking place in the next 6-12 months.  

 

Mrs. Buschke would like the funding explained.

 

According to Ms. Rex, this involves a large amount of federal funding—approximately $751,507 in HOME funds.  This did not include weatherization funds.  This is grant funds. There is another $100,000 which is also a grant.  Total grants amount to $861,509.  There is a loan for $290,000 with Oregon Affordable Housing Tax Credits which reduces the interest rate from 6% to 2% for 20 years.  

 

The majority of the funds are for construction costs--$686,900.  Much of the other is pre-development, loan costs, interest on the construction loan, reserves and contingencies, along with Ms. Rex’s fee of $32,500, of which $2500 is for expenses.  There is a developer fee for $35,000 which will go into a reserve account for the City.  In addition, she is proposing to pay off the current loan as soon as there is access to the HOME funds.  This way, there are no payments other than construction loan interest, to be made on the project until they take out a permanent loan.  They should be able to build a pretty good reserve account by working it this way.  

 

Ms. Rex has a concern about the elevator; she doesn’t think that it is possible to make it totally handicapped accessible.  The architects have pointed out that the shaft is not big enough to enlarge the elevator.  

 

Mr. Paustian stated that the residents would like to forego some items in order to get the elevator replaced.

 

Mrs. Buschke asked if there would be any of the tenants displaced because of their income.  According to Ms. Rex, that although the loan is based on low-income tenants, no tenants will be displaced as long as they pay 1/3 of their income for rent.  Mrs. Buschke stated that these tenants were not aware of the income stipulations.  According to Ms. Rex, there may only be one or two tenants that this applies to there is no cap.  Mr. Koffler stated that over time there may be people who cannot live in the center because of their higher income.  

 

Mr. Koffler asked about the general requirements for contractors for the work.  According to Ms. Rex, the minimum qualification is that contractors would have to pay to bond the total contract.  Ms. Rex stated that she would urge local contractors to bid on the project if they think they can bond the whole project.  According to City Attorney Kuhn, this is a state requirement.  Mr. Kuhn also stated that some of the local contractors do have a $1 million bonding capability.  Mr. Koffler asked if preference can be given to local contractors?  Ms. Rex is not sure at this time.  The contract would have to be advertised for bid.  Mrs. Andrews stated that they are recommending a 2 step bidding process.  The first step is to ask for a statement of qualifications from contractors.  References will be required.  Some of the work can be contracted.  Ms. Rex would like a list of local contractors, as well as sub contractors.  

 

Mr. Paustian stated that he would like Mrs. Andrews to talk to the local contractor on the elevator to see what can be done.  

 

Mr. Kuhn inquired about inspections and how often the project would be inspected.  According to Mrs. Andrews, they would expect to be here in Heppner to inspect at least one day every two weeks.  Mr. Kuhn stated that the amount for inspections should be discussed further.  Mrs. Andrews stated that either she or her partner would be doing the inspections.  

 

Mr. Koffler stated that a representative from the City should be on site every day if funding was available for this.  Mrs. Andrews doesn’t think this would be a full-time job.  Mr. Struthers had concerns about displacement of the tenants while the apartments are being renovated.  According to Mr. Paustian, this is not expected to be a problem.  Mr. Struthers also asked about the roof.  According to Mrs. Andrews, the roof was not brought up during the process.  According to Mr. De Mayo, the roof was inspected by Broderick Construction and at the time, the roof was in good condition.  This issue will be looked into further.  

 

Mrs. Buschke inquired about the mandatory meeting in Salem in January and whether the whole Housing Authority board is required to attend.  She stated that Ed Baker would be willing to take a senior bus to the meeting if necessary.  Mr. De Mayo stated that the Housing Authority members are encouraged to attend and the Housing Authority would pay the costs.  Mr. Paustian stated that this meeting is important.  Mr. De Mayo stated that there are federal requirements for any monies that are loaned.  

 

    C.  Interim City Manager.  Mr. Paustian introduced Steve Bogart who will be in Heppner on November 18-20 to work with Mr. De Mayo.  On December 10, Mr. Bogart will assume the position as Interim City Manager.  Mr. De Mayo will be departing on November 25.  

 

3.  CONSENT AGENDA.  

 

    B.  Resolution No. 691-07, A Resolution Approving Accounts Payable for Payment.

    C.  Monthly Financial Statement.

 

4.  COUNCIL ACTION.

 

Motion by Mrs. Doherty to Approve the items included in the Consent Agenda.  Seconded by Mrs. Robinson.  Motion Carried.  

 

5.  REPORT FROM THE FIRE CHIEF.

 

Fire Chief Estes reported the following actions during October:

 

    October was a quiet month.

    1 smoke alarm at the Senior Center—full evacuation; no problems

    Assisted Lexington with 1 structure fire and 1 wildland fire

    Assisted the ambulance with a rescue

    The Chief went on 22 calls on his own

 

Mr. Paustian asked if there had been any action on the burned home on Court Street.  Mr. De Mayo reported that Ryan Miller has been hired to demolish the property; Mr. Miller is waiting for equipment repair parts before starting work.

 

6.  REPORT FROM THE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT.  

 

 

    B.  Additional Discussion.  

 

        1)  Mr. Paustian introduced Keith Lewis as the new Council Representative to the Police Commission.  

 

        2)  Mr. Harmon commented that Deputy Braun has been doing an excellent job with his walking patrols on Main Street.  Mrs. Burleson also stated that she has heard favorable comments on this.  

 

        3) Abandoned Vehicles.  Sgt. Rayburn reported that he has information on towing vehicles which he will present at the next Police Commission meeting.  There is a new state law that will simplify the process.  Bert’s Auto Salvage in Hermiston will be represented at the meeting.  Mr. De Mayo stated that 8 vehicles have been removed so far, and he is awaiting a letter from Lars Wenberg to have at least 5 additional vehicles disposed of.

 

7.  REPORT FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

 

Mr. Paustian reported that the Planning Commission approved an Application to Consider the Subdivision of Parcel 1 of Tax Lot 2500, Map 2S 25 35CC, which is an extension of the cemetery to open up another section to provide additional lots.  According to Mr. Kuhn this needs Council approval.  Mr. De Mayo stated that this issue will be on the agenda for the next Council meeting.

 

8.  REPORT FROM HEPPNER HOUSING AUTHORITY.

 

Mrs. Buschke reported that issues have been discussed previously.  Mr. Koffler expressed Council appreciation for the Housing Authority’s work.

 

 

11.  REPORT FROM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.  

 

 

12.  REPORT FROM THE CITY MANAGER.

    A.  City Manager’s Report.

 

Discussion:

 

1.  St. Patrick’s Senior Center.  Discussed previously.

 

2.  Dental Office Lease.  The individual is unable act on this until next spring.

 

3.  Draft Resolution on Tippage fees.  This is a draft for possible consideration.

 

4.  Christmas Eve time off.  This will be discussed later.

 

5.  The auditors will be attending the December Council meeting.

 

6.  Water Improvement Project.  There is an additional $528.50 to be added to the amount stated.  The amount is $5537.00 approximately.

 

7.  Supplemental Budget.  This is for adjustments due to the receipt of tippage fees awarded by the County Court.

 

8.  Bids for the repair to Fire Hall and City Hall roofs and disposition of the old street sweeper.  This will be done later in the meeting.

 

9.  Sewer Plant Facilities Plan.  Mr. Moore’s presentation given earlier in the meeting.

 

Discussion:  Mr. Koffler requested the audit report be provided for review prior to the next Council meeting.  Mr. De Mayo will furnish this to the Council members.  

 

 

    1.  St. Patrick’s Senior Center – Grant/Loan Package.  

 

        a.  Presentation – Darlee Rex.  Addressed previously.

 

        b.  Presentation – Andrews Architects.  Addressed previously.

        

        c.  Bids for the street sweeper.  None received.

 

Action:  Motion by Mrs. Doherty to authorize the City Manager to take action to dispose of the old sweeper as he deems appropriate.  Seconded by Mrs. Buschke.  Motion Carried.

 

 

 

Discussion:  Mr. De Mayo reported that the revenue changes are either monies moved from the contingency in order to help fund the roof repair (City’s match), or tippage fees that have been granted by the County Court.  The new street sweeper loan is also included.

 

Action:  Motion by Mrs. Buschke to approve Resolution No. 692-07, A Resolution Approving a Supplemental Budget for FY 2007/2008.  Seconded by Mrs. Burleson.  Motion Carried.

 

        2.  Waste Treatment Plant—Facilities Plan.  Discussed Previously.

 

        3.  Opening of Bids for Roofing—Fire Hall, City Hall.

 

Discussion:  Mr. De Mayo reported that bids were sent to Northwest General Services, Rain Roofing, Walton Construction, Palmer Roofing, and Broderick Construction.  Responses were received from Broderick Construction and Palmer Roofing.  Bid responses are as follows:

 

Fire Hall Roof.

 

Broderick Construction – Fire Hall Roof - $7560.  If materials are hauled off and additional work done = $10,000 +/-.  Thickness 50 mil thermoplastic).  15 year warranty.

 

Palmer Roofing – Fire Hall Roof – (Depending on materials) - $14,200 (thinnest material- .045 TPO roof system), $15,379 (thickest materials - .060 TPO).  10 year warranty.

 

Mr. Koffler pointed out that both companies have done work in Heppner.  He also asked if Mr. De Mayo was satisfied if Broderick’s work was satisfactory.  According to Mr. De Mayo, Broderick did work at the Senior Center two years ago.  Mr. De Mayo stated that Broderick’s work was satisfactory.

 

Action:  Motion by Mr. Koffler to award the bid for the Fire House roof to Broderick Construction in the amount of $7560.  Seconded by Mrs. Doherty.  Motion Carried.  

 

City Hall Roof.

 

Broderick Construction – City Hall Roof – 10 year warranty, $11,250, (coat roof with epoxy coat II); 15 year warranty - $18,750.

 

Palmer Roofing – City Hall Roof – 2 Year Warranty - $9275.00  Install elastomeric coating to entire roof area and repair leaking areas w/ 4 mil APP roof membrane.

 

Mr. Koffler asked about the amount of the tippage fee award.  According to Mr. De Mayo, the amount was $18,000 from tippage fees for the City Hall and for the Fire Hall the amount was $9,000.  Mr. Koffler also questioned the information provided to the contractors in the bid requested.  Mr. De Mayo provided the letters sent out requesting bids for Council review.

 

Action:  Motion by Mrs. Burleson to accept the bid from Broderick Construction for the City Hall roof in the amount of $18,750 which includes a 15 year warranty.  Seconded by Mr. Koffler.  Motion Carried.

 

    4.  Contract Award for Architect Services for St. Patrick’s Senior Center and Apartments Renovation and Remodel of the center.

 

Discussion:  Mr. Koffler commented that he is familiar with Andrews Architects work and it is very professional.

 

Action:  Motion by Mr. Koffler to approve the contract with Andrews Architects, Inc. in the amount of $55,000, subject to legal review.  Seconded by Mrs. Doherty.

 

Additional Discussion:  Mr. Bogart commented that having an inspector on site was advisable.  Mr. Koffler asked if there is funds in the budget to pay for oversight.  According to Mr. De Mayo, this is not included in the contract and would have to be negotiated.  However, this would be part of the loan.

 

Question:  Motion Carried.

 

    5.  Comments from Mr. Harmon.  Mr. Harmon asked about the Sewer Plant Facilities Study.  He stated that the items that are being done now are necessary and may last for 15 years.  DEQ requires a facilities plan if a modernization is done in the future.  The same list of repairs required now was provided 6 years ago but they were not done until now.  Mr. Koffler would like the study done now in order to obtain an expert opinion.  He feels this should be handled by the Utilities Commission.

 

13.  REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY.

 

Mr. Kuhn commented that he has examined the Peddler’s and Solicitor’s Ordinance.  He has reviewed this and would recommend that he meet with the Police Commission to go over this.

 

Mr. Paustian commented that the State Highway governs sign posting.  

 

 

15.  EXECUTIVE SESSION:  

 

8:30 PM – Meeting adjourned to Executive Session Re Litigation (Moore Construction) ORS 192.660 (1)(H)

 

9:05 PM – Excutive Session concluded.

 

16.  ADJOURNMENT.  Regular Council Session adjourned at 9:06 PM.