Just call it Mudville

New Game:  SW Employment Area Plan IGA 

Spring Training 

Scorecard:

• Scott Lazenby - In response to a citizen comment, the City Manager told Council that the IGA with Metro would not commit the City to anything.  

See IGA Agreement, part of Agenda Item 8.3 from City Council Mtg on 1/21/2014,  Attachment 1, # 2. (Pg. 96 of 156).  See also Exhibit A (Deliverables - Pg. 100 o f156), and Exhibit B, (the Grant Request - Pg. 102 of 156). 

• Mayor Studabaker - inquired of the presenting planner, Sara Seldon, if the IGA would commit the city to anything or require the city to deliver certain outcomes.
• Jeff Gudman - also asked Ms. Seldon about requirements of the IGA and if changes could be changes could be made.  

Why did the Mayor or any Councilor have to ask about what the IGA Agreement contained?  Did they read and and study the document prior to  the meeting?  

• Ms. Seldon - responded to questions that the requirements of the agreement were not set in stone and could be amended if LO wanted - it would be negotiable and not a problem - just a conversation with Metro staff. 
• The City Attorney, David Powell - told the Council that the IGA committed the City to the deliverables in Exhibit A.  

Ms. Seldon should have given a more complete and definitive explanation of the commitments, content of the plan and Council options in order to educate the council.. Mr Powell, Ms. Seldon and Mr. Lazenby should have been more direct earlier on about the specifics of the IGA.  See the  Agreement  (Attachment 1)  -  #2 concerning city responsibilities, and #9 about how changes can be made in the Agreement.  And what about that last section in Exhibit A?  It may be nothing, but should it be checked out?  

• Donna Jordan - let the Council and listening audience know that the resulting Plan would be a Lake Oswego product, not a Metro product.

Ms. Jordan sits on Metro's Joint Policy Action Committee on Transportation (JPACT) and is involved in region-wide policy decisions on transportation.   Under terms of the IGA, the outcomes can only be changed with written agreement by Metro, which means that Lake Oswego has the final say on their document - if there are no changes requested, and if there were, only if Metro agrees.  

• Skip O'Neill - said that the city needs to make it easier for current and future businesses to do  come into the area and do business there.  

Clearly articulated goal.  Mr. O'Neill has (or had until recently) a business and property in the area.

• Karen Bowerman - remarked that the IGA did not speak to the issue of making it easier for businesses, but followed the same Metro mindset by stressing density, mixed-use, housing, retail, etc.  No mention of the benefit of light industrial businesses, even though one of the city's biggest (400-500 employee, high value) private employers is the district, or that the market for suburban offices is predicted to remain soft.  
• Lauren Hughes - asked that the Plan be downsized in scope and done in-house, and that the Plan elements were not appropriate to that area and more of a Metro concept than LO's.

Focus on simplified LO needs rather than an off-the-shelf format that repeats Metro-type outcomes.  There was question of the urgency of this plan's scope and purpose.  Questions demonstrated a level of thoughtfulness coming from an understanding of the contents of the packet.  

The IGA Agreement with Metro for $80,000 was approved.  

Smells like cheep beer on dimer night at the ballpark.