[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6462420,"mediaKeyId","5809589-a56c99ad4ca0afc06de4c38842dc8beb","parentId",5809589,"title","Oregon City approves two annexation resolutions after heated debate over growth rate and service capacity","audioSeconds",1357,"startMs",3898000,"endMs",5255000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5809589-a56c99ad4ca0afc06de4c38842dc8beb&start=3898&end=5255","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5809589-a56c99ad4ca0afc06de4c38842dc8beb/thumbnail_3898000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6462420/Oregon-City/Clackamas-County/Oregon/Oregon-City-approves-two-annexation-resolutions-after-heated-debate-over-growth-rate-and-service-capacity","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6462420-440ca5c451a36e4cfbc33144fe7a99c8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770873138&Signature=C2iiI-tgjl10G6Ad0OfAbCm9ZJVrLZItC3uVY4J0JiWBU1fxZ3ZxtW-LIm5X1Xd-M7dyX4apyuHaoGjjMH14FRs--3L~5KvUR5mUkq-1XRtlA0e4PH3vaj-50OPgg902c9HCyF1Ewgy7KYsiuYF3GtjL33PDxltUaim3JCpMmg-Z5LKu9AbybCar9Wng3ufZ37RYYFAwkFrHGXzluKqnHm~erJMhMBx-zph17~1XDFpm8zX73wTFY-6u3uZ-ZHa9Z1IXKG1eGxaMAdPlLST-oJaogkWMFlPDfPuXLHPhFTUBbHeYAVKwRqATWHmTo~wl3CVsJArzZ-LgUBPB94ZKDg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Oregon, OR","date","2025-09-22T21:42:44Z","article","The Oregon City Commission adopted resolutions (filed as 97-44 and 97-45 on the record) approving two annexations after substantial discussion on Sept. 3, 1997. Commissioners debated whether the city should slow annexations to allow staff time to plan for service delivery, but a majority voted to approve the resolutions.

Discussion preceding the vote focused on city capacity to provide police, fire, parks and other services amid rapid development. Several commissioners expressed concern that growth, and the pace of annexation, was stressing maintenance and service budgets; one commissioner noted parks maintenance funding had declined in recent years and urged attention to upkeep of existing facilities before acquiring more land. Other commissioners argued that annexation can expand the tax base and provide funding for infrastructure and that staff could recommend denying annexations where they are judged problematic.

After debate, a motion to withhold recommendation on the annexations failed and a subsequent motion to adopt the resolutions passed. Recorded votes on the resolution motion: Commissioner Powell (yes), Commissioner Neely (yes/aye recorded in sequence), Commissioner Lynch (aye), Commissioner Alec (no for at least one procedural vote earlier), and Mayor Powell (yes) (votes recorded in the meeting minutes). The record shows mixed individual votes during earlier consent-agenda procedures, but the resolution adoption carried by majority.

Commissioners also discussed broader policy options, including whether to request a work session or retreat to examine growth policy, SDC adjustments and service levels. Staff said they would bring forward reports on rate/schedule review, and the commission discussed scheduling work sessions on narrow-street design standards, modular space for city hall, and potential levy conversations for recreational and community facilities.

The annexation approvals will be forwarded to the boundary commission and administrative processes for finalization; staff and commissioners agreed to continue discussing strategic citywide issues including SDC adjustments and service-capacity planning.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Commission Regular Meeting September 03, 1997","oneSentenceSummary","The commission voted to adopt resolutions authorizing two annexations (resolutions 97-44 and 97-45) after extended debate on whether the city is growing faster than it can service. Commissioners split on the policy question but approved the resolutions by majority vote.","taxTitle","Oregon City, Clackamas County, Oregon","taxId",53937,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6462425,"Oregon City approves reimbursement to mobile-home-park owners for sewer and water extension and authorizes development agreement",669,3222000,3891000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5809589-a56c99ad4ca0afc06de4c38842dc8beb&start=3222&end=3891","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5809589-a56c99ad4ca0afc06de4c38842dc8beb/thumbnail_3222000.jpg","/articles/6462425/Oregon-City/Clackamas-County/Oregon/Oregon-City-approves-reimbursement-to-mobile-home-park-owners-for-sewer-and-water-extension-and-authorizes-development-agreement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6462425-87cf5d2fe1af9bc05ad85c2b6b6cf497/orig.mp4?Expires=1770873138&Signature=KEJ27Oo7z1FJf2kkKVIzyP5RRD3Dlj-x~WkwWuqzS~po9E7DDUMe3kioXiaJ8q2aU~y8rkwgEsM2X9gfAUZ8O11F~NgL6E4rFmPBln8QAye6NLP5GVToNfnzrKv5hSVVlxEVrcUd7xaToLiZaZZ8f7~TlhcBhX7KCPExDLTK8piBwcaY61aiiyrIrCBfwmJ~sBTbi0HaQVWNwe2X1FjM3VThM81hsmywQIU5AB-NPTMJtdRwZZTyEwssVwftvY8Rr-Qw3WBqEsZhwMKGqf-CNbkmfBO0yrF1Z3SLxzqxxXWEr7ISCx4TLaq5-Z5AmWzhGPntCVzWovHOWpnWFlmWfg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Oregon City Commission approved Commission Report 97-128 on Sept. 3, 1997, authorizing reimbursement to John and Carol Laughlin for sewer and water infrastructure they constructed to extend service along Highway 213 to Cherry Lane Mobile Home Park and authorizing the city manager to execute related agreements.

Nancy (last name not stated), a staff member in the utilities/planning team, presented a history of the project. The Laughlins had moved forward with construction because their park expansion timeline required infrastructure; an advanced finance district had not been established before construction. Staff calculated total project costs and estimated future equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) that the installed lines could serve (about 170 EDUs by staff estimate). Using that projection, staff apportioned the project costs: the Laughlins' share for 67 existing units was $127,368.79, and the non-Laughlin apportionment for properties that could be served in the future was $193,420.24.

Nancy recommended reimbursing the Laughlins for the portion of the project that serves other properties and that the reimbursement be paid from water and sewer SDC funds; she also recommended a signed development agreement to bind repayment and to reimburse the Laughlins for a $150 advanced-finance-district fee they had paid. Staff said the installed infrastructure was placed at elevations and locations that would allow future extension to the urban growth boundary without major rework.

Commissioners asked where funds would come from; staff said the SDC funds are available and the next item on the agenda was a corresponding budget amendment. The city manager confirmed he and staff had met with the Laughlins and that the Laughlins had agreed to the proposed approach. A motion to approve the report was moved and seconded; the commission voted unanimously to approve the staff recommendations.

Actions authorized by the vote included payment from water and sewer SDC reserves to reimburse the Laughlins for the portion of the project calculated to serve other properties and authorization for the city manager to execute a development agreement to document reimbursements and obligations.","The commission authorized payment from water and sewer SDC funds to reimburse private developers (the Laughlins) for sewer and water lines they built to serve Cherry Lane Mobile Home Park and to execute a development agreement for future reimbursements.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6462429,"Oregon City commission tables proposal to designate 15.93 acres as future parkland, directs manager to continue negotiations",2656,647000,3303000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5809589-a56c99ad4ca0afc06de4c38842dc8beb&start=647&end=3303","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5809589-a56c99ad4ca0afc06de4c38842dc8beb/thumbnail_647000.jpg","/articles/6462429/Oregon-City/Clackamas-County/Oregon/Oregon-City-commission-tables-proposal-to-designate-1593-acres-as-future-parkland-directs-manager-to-continue-negotiations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6462429-018ae97058001062c7db3ca1e7983eb7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770873138&Signature=M0u~~QkOm7Z~20TL0v4PO64IO~rIE3iE58DLDCyNmzdORaLuGitsGQYiKvNC5ZqANq3tbAIE09839aOuVtGZVRXYq3utrE8XUF9lKwlUQ34b18vzyPAvCzS17lHD6SZepMm~cMHJQfJAnslLxrNZh7pDHVXPccjMHNPsu15Xnd0aNRFIBNGtwHsXAr7SMMr1TCcDNunLT71-CFHn-x46b2znC~8SQyZxz0ESp~UHfMh0iRN7QDX28G425fl6uNEBIFJlFPkPMhJzmEdnwD6KSB-4TVHPowtI4PlLr6plSuBsMCQGbaJp0GGoYMTRAt4F0WuX9-fmUY1twuLBzeOYOw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Oregon City Commission members on Sept. 3, 1997, voted to table a staff proposal to formally designate roughly 15.93 acres near Leland Road as future parkland and instructed the city manager to continue negotiations with affected property owners and return the proposal to the commission for further consideration.

The item, presented as Commission Report 97-130, would amend the parks master plan and the comprehensive plan to identify school-district-owned property and adjacent land as potential community parkland. Planner Tamara DeRidder told the commission the change would not obligate the city to buy the land: \"This in no way says we will have to buy this property. It's only a symbol identifying the area for which we need to purchase the property in the future,\" she said.

DeRidder and staff explained the map change would convert the school-district parcel from low-density residential to parks on the comprehensive-plan maps and that negotiations with the school district had been authorized within certain limits. Staff also reported a title/access question over a 50-foot access easement across an adjacent parcel owned by Cheryl Vincini, whose attorney provided a conditional authorization the same day as the meeting.

Public testimony included residents and neighborhood association representatives who said they supported identifying potential parkland but urged careful sequencing: several speakers told commissioners they preferred staff continue negotiations and return with a clearer status of agreements, prices and access. Neighbors and the parks advisory committee had visited the site, and supporters described the site as a relatively flat parcel that could serve as a community park for a growing area.

Several commissioners raised concerns about changing plan maps before a signed purchase agreement. Commissioners questioned whether designating a specific site could create unrealistic expectations for the property owner or complicate negotiations. Commissioner comments also emphasized that the city already has undeveloped park parcels and limited maintenance funding; one commissioner said the park maintenance budget had fallen from about $45,000 a year to approximately $17,900 and cautioned against acquiring more land without addressing upkeep of existing parks.

Staff clarified funding options and policy: system development charges (SDCs) can be used for capital improvements (for example, installing a ball field or playground) but not for routine maintenance, and SDCs can be programmed through the capital improvement plan. Commissioners discussed alternatives including a plan-level service target that identifies acreage needs rather than specific sites.

After debate, Commissioner Anne (last name not specified in the record) moved to table the proposal with instructions that the city manager continue discussions with the school district and other property owners and return the proposal to the commission. An amendment requiring staff to bring the proposal back to the commission before a specified later meeting was added. The commission voted on the motion as amended and the motion carried.

The commission did not adopt the proposed map amendments at this meeting. By tabling the item, commissioners left staff authority to continue negotiations and directed that any returned proposal include clarifications on access, ownership consent and the relationship between acquisition and the parks master plan and capital program.

Next steps outlined by commissioners and staff included: continuing confidential negotiations with the school district and private owners, clarifying the existence or scope of the access easement via title review, and returning a revised recommendation to the commission that clarifies whether a site-specific designation is required for SDC programming or whether a level-of-service approach would be preferable.","The Oregon City Commission paused action on a proposed amendment to the parks master plan and comprehensive plan that would identify about 15.93 acres near Leland Road as potential future parkland. Commissioners directed the city manager to continue negotiations with the school district and a private owner and return the matter to the commission.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Oregon City approves two annexation resolutions after heated debate over growth rate and service capacity

Oregon City approves reimbursement to mobile-home-park owners for sewer and water extension and authorizes development agreement

Oregon City commission tables proposal to designate 15.93 acres as future parkland, directs manager to continue negotiations