Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Surplus Real Property topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Tigard council streamlines code for disposing surplus property, votes 5–2 after amendment

2658577 · March 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The council voted 5–2 to adopt Ordinance 25-03, revising Chapter 3.44 to simplify procedures for disposing of surplus city real property and to direct the city manager to carry out dispositions subject to council approval of final terms.

The Tigard City Council adopted Ordinance 25-03, amending Municipal Code Chapter 3.44 to streamline procedures for disposals of surplus real property and to align the code with state statute. The ordinance passed 5–2 after a council amendment.

City Attorney Rahala presented the staff report and described the measure as a housekeeping cleanup to remove distinctions (for example, “substandard undeveloped” property) that are not required by state law. She told the council the amended language would require a council finding that the public interest is furthered by a disposition and would direct the city manager to effectuate sales, exchanges or conveyances under public contracting rules rather than preserve several antiquated local steps.

Council discussion focused on public notice and the council’s role in approving final terms. Councilor Shaw moved to approve the ordinance; it was seconded and later amended to retain a council direction to the city manager (so the council would still “direct the city manager or designee to take further appropriate action”) and to remove prescriptive language in subsection C beyond the single sentence giving the council final authority to approve terms of disposition. The amendment passed on voices (reported as 6–1 during debate) and the final ordinance passed on a roll-call vote of 5 in favor and 2 opposed.

The roll-call recorded these votes (advisory youth vote noted): Youth Councilor Maimini — yes; Councilor Shaw — yes; Council President Wolff — yes; Councilor Gaudisi — no; Councilor Hu — yes; Mayor Lueb — yes; Councilor Robbins — yes; Councilor Schack — no. The council directed the city manager to implement dispositions consistent with the amended language; no specific property sale was approved at the meeting.