|
Misinformation
|
The Facts
|
"Spelled out, that’s $3,000,000,000! Or, put another way, the cost of Measure
3-375, per Damascus household, will exceed $500,000."
The above was stated in the Official Clackamas County 2011 Special Election Voters’
Pamphlet, one of the arguments in opposition of measure 3-375 submitted by Don McIntire
(representing the Taxpayer Association of Oregon, paid for by the Taxpayer Association of Oregon with in-kind donation
from Ask Damascus)
|
The statement is inaccurate because:
When we look at the claim where $3,000,000,000 would equate to $500,000 per house
hold that equates to 6,000 households. What this suggests is all infrastructure
development is to be paid for by current residents of Damascus and not those who
will be moving here. It also suggests that developers will not be subject to System
Development Charges (SDCs) which would be used to pay for increased infrastructure
to accommodate future development. So what this statement proposes is current households
will pay the entire bill for Damascus’ infrastructure development costs while those
who move to Damascus and the developers will have a free ride.
Even in early projections, development was projected to be over a 20 year period.
Other sources include:
Councilor Shannon’s story in the April 2011 City newsletter, titled "Building a City – How Much Will It Cost And Who Should Pay
For It?"
Blog post regarding this issue titled, "The Comp Plan means $500,000 owed by each homeowner"
|
"They’re going into backyard telling you what kind of plants you can plant or
not plant." (The above statement is in reference to Metro)
Statement from Mayor Steve Spinnett in his interview with Metro.
|
The statement is inaccurate because:
This refers only to land within an area designated as Habitat Conservation
Areas (HCA), of which the majority of land in Damascus does not fall within such
designation. This also applies to new development or significant redevelopment
only that is within an HCA, not property within an HCA that has already been
developed.
Suggested planting due to new development or significant redevelopment within an
HCA designated area is up to the governing body, not Metro. In this case it would
be the city of Damascus. If Damascus had not been incorporated properties within
an HCA designated area would be subject to what has been adopted by Clackamas County.
Source of information:
Blog post regarding this issue titled, "I can only plant my yard with what Metro says."
|
"In the plan where it states we need to go to Metro for routine maintenance,
if we live in the restricted areas, and if I paint my house without permission am
I then a criminal?"
The above is a statement from Ask Damascus leader at the February 7, 2011 Damascus
City Council meeting.
|
The statement is inaccurate because:
People do not need to go to Metro to get permission for doing routine maintenance.
Metro has no such procedure. What such a statement means is every property owner
who falls within Metro’s urban growth boundary would (which includes the vast majority
of homeowners within the Portland metropolitan area) would need to contact and receive
permission from Metro for any home maintenance or house painting.
According to sources of statistical information, the Portland metropolitan area,
according to 2009 estimates, consists of 2,241,841 citizens with a total of 885,127 housing units and is the country’s
28th largest metropolitan area.
If such restrictions were in place it would be more for the local governance to
enforce which, however restrictions such as made in this statement are more closely
found in respective Home Owner Associations.
Also, a detailed analysis of this statement may also be found through a post regarding
this issue titled, "Needing permission from Metro before painting your home."
|
"The city has budgeted an excess of $10,502,112 for planning since 2006, where
has the money gone? Now staff is asking for more through additional fees."
The above is a statement is in reference to the Comprehensive Plan created by Damascans
and found in an open letter from Steve Spinnett on why he is running for Mayor of
Damascus.
|
The statement is inaccurate because:
According to a 2010 story in the Damascus City Newsletter from the Director of Finance
for the City of Damascus titled, "You Asked; We Listened: Finances Q&A"
"Totaling all budgets from the date of incorporation until June 30, 2009 the
city had a total budget of $10,502,112 for the Community Development Fund. Actual
expenditures during this time period were $3,697,009. The city received $705,954
in grants to offset part of these expenditures."
|
"Last year the City of Damascus pushed the comprehensive plan through it’s approval
with such speed and force that the integrity of the process was lost."
The above statement is found in an opposing statement submitted by Mayor Steve Spinnett
in the Official Clackamas County 2011 Special Election Voters’ Pamphlet (with in-kind donation to Ask Damascus ) |
The statement is inaccurate because:
The city has been working on this plan since 2006 with multiple options for citizens
to provide input. The input consisted of coffee klatches as well as 16 public meetings
sponsored by the city. State law says that after a city incorporates the city has
four years in which to prepare and submit a comprehensive plan addressing the relevant
statewide goals as established by Oregon’s state legislature back in 1973.
Damascus incorporated in 2004 and had until 2008 to deliver a comprehensive plan
to the state. Given an extension by the state of Oregon until 2009 the state of Oregon sent Damascus a letter of warning in early
2010 placing the city on warning saying a comprehensive plan was past due and if
not received they would provide a comprehensive plan that would meet the relevant
statewide goals.
|
"Less than 200 people attended these citizen meetings."
The above statement is found in an opposing statement submitted by Mayor Steve Spinnett
in the Official Clackamas County 2011 Special Election Voters’ Pamphlet (with in-kind donation to Ask Damascus)
|
The city of Damascus has provided, since 2006, 1,579 opportunities of public involvement
to deliver and receive input from citizens. Such vehicles for information gathering
and distributing information since 2006 include:
- Coffee Klatches: 39
- Summer Socials: 9
- Coffee with a Councilor: 44
- City Council meetings: 141
- Council Work Sessions: 177
- Community Coordinating Committee meetings: 36
- Planning Commission meetings: 27
- Natural Features meetings: 38
- Development Code meetings: 46
- Transportation meetings: 9
- Public Involvement Committee for Citizen Involvement: 59
- Neighborhood Networks Development meetings: 8
- Comprehensive Plan open houses: 8
- Urban Forestry Ordinance Open Houses: 3
- Budget meetings: 9
- Special Events (Day in Damascus, Holiday Celebration, Hail & Farewell, Cleanup/Recycle):
16
- Surveys: 4
- Online citizen request forms (iWorQ Citizen): 881
Other avenues for information input and distribution not counted at this time include:
- City Newsletters
- Planning News Quarterly
- Annual Reports
- Citizen requests for action or information
- Individual citizen meetings with staff
As may be seen, the city has provided multiple opportunities and methods through
which to distribute information and obtain feedback.
The reason the above figures start from 2006 is to examine public outreach mechanisms
since the City Council, through resolution 06-81 did not "accept" the comprehensive
plan developed by Metro, Clackamas County and the Oregon Department of Transportation.
It was in 2006 the City Council decided to begin developing a comprehensive plan
by the City of Damascans for Damascans by Damascans.
The city has always wished for more public input but through various methods of
obtaining input and distributing information, the city can only gain as much input
based on people who are willing to attend the meetings as well as provide input.
|
"This plan did not come from our citizens. This plan has been promoted and
pushed through from the likes of Metro, planners, and out of state engineering and
consulting firms."
The above statement was found in an opposing statement submitted by Josh Lattin,
Ron Briones and Jim Butler in the Official Clackamas County 2011 Special Election
Voters’ Pamphlet (with in-kind contribution by Josh Lattin to Ask Damascus and
in-kind contribution by Ron Briones to Ask Damascus
|
In 2006 Damascus City Council adopted a resolution (Resolution 06-81). The resolution was to "receive"
the comprehensive plan developed by Metro, Clackamas County and the Oregon Department
of Transportation and not "accept" the plan. It was stated the plan was
not binding on the city of Damascus.
During that meeting then Councilor Wright said, "he feels this is much ado
about nothing as the City is not adopting or implementing the plan. He said he would
just like to get this behind us and start on the City’s own process."
From that point the city of Damascus started the process for developing a new comprehensive
plan for Damascans by Damascans.
With the expertise, or lack thereof, of a small, just-starting-out city the city
did enlist the services of firms who have expertise with Oregon’s laws and planning
policies and could provide expertise on such issues as transportation, water, sewage,
to name a few. Of the firms hired with the comprehensive plan adopted by the city
through resolution 2010-45, they were hired by the city of Damascus, who was the
"customer", instead of the previous comprehensive plan attempts where
Damascans were not the customer and were not managing the process.
|
"WE DON’T WANT IT!
WE DON’T NEED IT!
WE CAN’T AFFORD IT!"
The above statement was found in an opposing statement submitted by Josh Lattin,
Ron Briones and Jim Butler in the Official Clackamas County 2011 Special Election
Voters’ Pamphlet (with in-kind contribution by Josh Lattin to Ask Damascus and
in-kind contribution by Ron Briones to Ask Damascus ) |
Through Senate
Bill 100, passed in 1973, every city within the state of Oregon is required
to submit a comprehensive plan on how they are to accommodate the relevant state-wide
goals required by the state.
During a City Council meeting in 2006 the Damascus City Council
"received", not "accepted" the comprehensive plan developed
by Metro, Clackamas County and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Instead
the city began a new initiative to develop a new comprehensive plan for Damascus
by Damascans with the city of Damascus driving the development of the comprehensive
plan. The plan developed by the city of Damascans with citizen input provides for
fewer residents than called for in the non-Damascus created plan. This plan also
calls for a lower density of development per buildable acre than the non-Damascus
created plan.
So to address the three statements specifically:
"we don’t want it"
It is not perfect but this plan provides for a smaller population with lower density
requirements than the non-Damascus developed plans.
"We don’t need it"
A comprehensive plan is required by state law. The law states Damascus needed to
submit a comprehensive plan to the state four years after incorporation (due in
2008). The state allowed for a 1 year extension making the plan due in 2009. In
2010 the state place the city of Damascus on warning in that they had better submit
a comprehensive plan or have one provided to the city that was developed outside
of Damascus.
"We can’t afford it"
Four items come to mind:
- The statement presumes the total cost of infrastructure build out to support development
will be $3,000,000,000.
- The statement presumes the total cost will be paid for by the current residents
of Damascus, giving a free ride to new residents and developers who would normally
pay for such development costs. ($3,000,000,000 total infrastructure cost /$500,000
cost per house hold = 6,000 households)
- The statement presumes the city will not utilize System Development Charges (also
known as an Impact
Fee) as used by other cities throughout the state and country to offset
the burden of providing infrastructure to handle new development.
- The statement presumes the grants will not be obtained to offset other development
costs.
|