The URL can be used to link to this page

G-570 Louaillier 11-20-2023 Current Planning Public Comments and Testimony Please fill out the form, below,to submit written comments on a pending land use application or an appeal of a tree removal request.All written comments and materials are due by the deadline listed on the Notice. Written submittals received by the deadline will be entered into the public record of file and will be considered by the decision body.Contact the staff coordinator listed on the Notice if you have questions. Case Number* Please see Notice for correct LU or tree appeal number. LU 23-0002/AP 23-04:A request for an RP District(wetland)Unavoidable Crossing to Install a Sewer Line and Serial Lot Line Adjustments. If you do not see your case here the comment period is not open. Please check back later. Case Number- LU 23-0002/AP 23-04:A request for an RP District(wetland) Unavoidable Crossing Verification* to Install a Sewer Line and Serial Lot Line Adjustments. Please re-select your case number to ensure it routes to the appropriate case. First Name* Mike Last Name* Louaillier Address Street Address Address Line 2 City State/Province/Region Postal/Zip Code Email* louaillier@comcast.net Stance:* r Support C•' Opposition r Neither for nor against Please type your comments below,or you may upload a PDF of your comments. If you have other media types, please contact planning@lakeoswego.city to coordinate its addition to the public record. Comments File Upload LU 23-0002_Statement-in-Oppostion_LoveLOParks- 19.97MB Steering-Committee.pdf PDF format only STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION LoveLOParks Steering Committee (“Lake Oswego SC”) opposes LU 23-0002. LoveLOPark SC requests the DRC reject LU 23-0002 on the premise a sewer line through Waluga Park - West is not permitted and is unlawful by Lake Oswego’s (“City”) governing regulations, specifically the Chapter 1 - Lake Oswego Charter (“City Charter”) - Chapter X - Park Development Limitation (“Chapter X”) enacted by voters on November 2, 2021. The City Charter - Chapter X is superior to City Code - Chapter 50 - Community Development Code. LoveLOParks SC is the architect of the current City Charter - Chapter X’s legal requirements which originated from our citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1, filed on November 14, 2019, and ratified by majority vote (62%) for Measure 3-568 in the November 2, 2021 Special Election. LoveLOParks SC was precise, deliberate and intentional when crafting City Charter - Chapter X’s language to ensure the preservation of 15 natural area parks. Our “Protect Our Natural Parks” campaign and communication with the LO community spanned 2 years across multiple communication mediums for both citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 and the resulting Measure 3-568. We were concise and consistent in communicating the intent of our City Charter amendment that prohibits all development inconsistent with preserving a Nature Preserve as a natural area. Additionally, Oregon statutes for citizen initiative petitions set a high bar for transparency; meaning disclosure of the full legal text for the initiative. Petition circulators carried and furnished the full text of our proposed law to petition signers; likewise, e- sheet (aka single signer petitions) downloaded or sent by direct mail were required to be accompanied by the full legal text. Quite literally we had an informed electorate and that electorate chose to codify into our City’s laws protections mandating the City to preserve our Nature Preserves. LoveLOParks SC is disappointed the City has placed the DRC in this unnecessary legal predicament for LU 23-0002 : •Mayor, City Council, the City Manager, and the City Attorney should have recognized the City Charter - Chapter X conflict on November 2, 2021, when Ordinance 2874 was discussed at length, and certainly on March 2, 2022, before Ordinance 2874 was approved. Nonetheless, City staff proceeded under their direction without acknowledging the applicability of City Charter - Chapter X. •Lake Forest NA’s comments submitted to City staff on LU 23-0002’s notice of development are concise and accurate to City Charter - Chapter X’s intention to preserve Waluga Park - West as a natural habitat : “Position 1: Lake Forest NA finds that extending a public sewer through Waluga Park- West violates the City Charter, specifically Chapter X Park Development Limitation.” •City staff, instead of recognizing this oversight, chose to fabricate a fiction narrative on the intentions of City Charter - Chapter X by the text's architects (us), petition signers, and the voters. The City’s narrative that voters wouldn’t consider the clearing of a 17’ x 525’ natural habitat a non-compliant destructive action counter to preserving the natural area is fictional, disrespectful, disingenuous and false. •The City failed to substantiate why other viable alternatives haven’t been pursued. •The City intentionally failed to disclosure to the general voting public the City’s intent to allow development in the protect natural habitat of Waluga Park - West. Chapter X has not been disclosed in all documentation published by the City leading up to the notice of LU 23-0002. The public, even by the City’s omission on election night, must be consulted before any development occurs in Waluga Park - West. LoveLOParks SC’s rationale in the following pages further justify the DRC rejecting LU 23-0002: •Rationale 1 - Applicable Regulations •Rationale 2 - Unlawful annexation •Rationale 3 - City’s Past Interpretation •Rationale 4 - City’s Current Interpretation •Rationale 5 - Willful Blindness Doctrine LoveLOParks SC’s membership are the following Lake Oswego residents : •Betsy Wosko •Brad Home •Kirsten Sommer •Mike Louaillier •Scott & Joey Handley (Chief Petitioners 2020IN-1) Rationale 1: Applicable Regulations The City Charter and City Code enumerate the City’s governance system. The City Charter has superiority over City Code; therefore City Charter - Chapter X can not be ignored as an “applicable regulation” when determining land use as it pertains to Nature Preserves. On November 2, 2021, Lake Oswego voters ratified Measure 3-568’s City Charter - Chapter X, replacing the the 1978 City Charter - Chapter X, and renewing the mandate on our City’s governance body to protect these Nature Preserves for development. The following “regulations” are applicable and the legal grounds to reject LU 23-0002: Chapter 1 - Lake Oswego Charter … Chapter X - Park Development Limitation Section 41. Purpose. The purpose of this Chapter is to preserve all designated Nature Preserves that are owned by the City of Lake Oswego, inclusive of the fifteen natural parks specified in this Chapter, as natural areas for the enjoyment of all residents of and visitors to Lake Oswego. This Chapter shall be interpreted liberally to achieve this purpose. Section 42. Definitions. … Waluga Park – West means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Waluga Park – West" (22.8 acres, more or less, to the East of Inverurie Drive, to the North of SW Oakridge Road, to the West of Waluga Drive). … Nature Preserve means natural area parks or open spaces owned by the City of Lake Oswego that are managed or maintained to retain their natural condition and prevent habitat deterioration. Nature Preserves that are subject to the limitations of this Chapter, which upon ratification will initially include, Bryant Woods Park, Canal Acres, Cornell Natural Area, Cooks Butte Park, Glenmorrie Greenway, Hallinan Woods, Iron Mountain Park, Kerr Open Space, Lamont Springs Natural Area, River Run, Southshore Natural Area, Springbrook Park, Stevens Meadows, Waluga Park – West, and Woodmont Natural Park. … Section 43. Limitations on Development. The City of Lake Oswego shall insure that all development within a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area available for public enjoyment. … The City of Lake Oswego shall not construct or develop (or allow any person to construct or develop) any Athletic Facility, any Telecommunications Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles within a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall not cut (or allow any person to cut) any tree in a Nature Preserve for the purpose of facilitating the construction or development of any Athletic Facility, any Telecommunications Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles. … Section 44. Effective Date. This Chapter carries an effective date of November 2, 2021. … The use of “shall” is intentional. ”Shall” is a specific legal term meaning mandatory. It does not mean “maybe” or “if circumstances allow” or “if practicable.” Every statement in City Charter - Chapter X containing “shall” is a deliberate mandatory requirement. Section 41 is the chapter’s purpose statement, not Section 43 as the City’s Staff Report page 11 tries to suggest with their fanciful narrative. The purpose statement mandates the City liberally interpret the entirety of the City Charter - Chapter X toward the overarching goal of preserving Nature Preserves as natural areas. Section 42’s introduces a deliberate definition, “Nature Preserve” which classifies all the protected natural areas and open spaces. Per Merriam-Webster’s definition for “preserve”, it is “the activity or process of keeping something valued alive, intact, or free from damage or decay.” Section 43’s first statement is a mandatory limitation, NOT a purpose statement, that all development must be consistent with preserving a Nature Preserve as a natural area. And, has been broadly communicated to petition signers and voters for both the 2020IN-1 and Measure 3-568 campaigns. We purposely added the additional development limitations to address the prior City attempted and existing developments in these natural areas to break any future precedence the City might try to claim. “Nature Preserve,” “preserve,” and “natural area” are deliberately used consistently across Sections 41, 42, & 43. By Section 41’s purpose, Section 42’s definition for Nature Preserves, and Section 43’s prohibition on development inconsistent with preserving a Nature Preserve as a natural habitat, LU 23-0002’s sewer line through Walua Park - West is unlawful. LU 23-0002 severely destroys habitat, including tree removal, in Waluga West - Park for a 17’ wide by 525' long road to facilitate trenching and installation of a sewer line. This damage to the natural area is a direct contradiction to preservation and an unlawful activity in a Nature Preserve. Furthermore, when Measure 3-568 passed, the City promptly issued a press release, shared on the City’s website and on the City’s social media accounts, acknowledging to voters that “any future property-specific change” would require their approval: •City’s Press Release (https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/sites/default/files/fileattachments/2021-11-02 PRESS RELEASE Nov 2 Parks Measure Results Citizen FINAL.pdf) Excerpt: During the November 2, 2021 Special Election, Lake Oswego voters passed the Citizen’s Initiative 3-568. Through voter approval, the City will amend Chapter X of the Lake Oswego Charter to include additional protections of our natural areas. Any future property-specific changes will include voter approval. “I would like to give special thanks to all the community members engaged in the parks measure campaigns,” Mayor Joe Buck said. “Love LO Parks elevated the issue of natural area protections for a broad set of acreage within the city. The City will continue to work together with the Friends Groups, Oswego Watershed Council and the community on the comprehensive approach needed to enhance ecological conditions throughout the City.” •City’s website (https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/parksrec/city-proposed-ballot-measure-3-575) •City’s X (formerly Twitter) post (https://x.com/LakeOswegoInfo/status/1455750465359003651? s=20) •City’s NextDoor Post (https://nextdoor.com/p/57_NTZH4WPtY) “With the passing of the Citizen’s Initiative 3-568, the City commits to uphold the voters’ request for additional protections of our natural areas. Any future property-speciﬁc changes will include voter approval. The citizen proposed initiative 3-568 will be adopted into law through the amending of Chapter X of the Lake Oswego Charter.” Rationale 2: Unlawful annexation LoveLOParks SC asserts the properties referenced in LU 23-0002 were unlawfully annexed (Ordinance 2874) due to the omission and lack of consideration for City Charter - Chapter X as an “applicable regulation;” therefore, LU 23-0002 is an unlawful development and must be rejected. Supporting Evidence: 1. Election Day - November 2, 2021 Lake Oswego voters ratified Measure 3-568 thereby installing the new City Charter - Chapter X, effective immediately. 2. City Council Meeting - November 2, 2021 The Mayor, the City Council, the City Manager, and City staff held a lengthy discussion on Ordinance 2874. While discussing the sewer line through Waluga Park - West, they failed to acknowledge the two competing natural park measures, Measure 3-568 (citizens) and Measure 3-575 (City’s), being decided by voters that evening. Both measures, the citizens’ or the City’s, would have required the City to reconsider the sewer line through Waluga Park - West. 3. City Council Meeting - March 17, 2022 The Mayor and City Council unlawfully approved Ordinance 2874 without any discussion. With the recently installed new City Charter - Chapter X, there should have been some discussion on Waluga Park - West — but, nothing. Ordinance 2874 should have been rejected and returned to City staff with the directive to choose an alternative sewer line path or directed City staff to draft a measure seeking approval from voters. 4. City Charter - Chapter X omission as an “applicable regulation” The City Charter - Chapter X omission as an “applicable regulation” in Ordinance 2874, and its omission in all public City notices and documents up until the Staff Report dated October 25, 2023, has obscured timely disclosure to the public at large on impacts to Waluga Park - West. While the Lake Forest NA became aware on or after July 19, 2023, the neighborhood constitutes a small fraction of the voting public who ratified City Charter - Chapter X and protected Waluga Park - West. Furthermore, City staff proceeded to accelerate the timeline by preemptively scheduling the DRC appeal meeting. This tactic is purely meant to circumvent and stifle public awareness and input. The voting public who ratified City Charter - Chapter X deserve the right to weigh in on the habitat destruction being considered at Waluga Park - West. These omissions appear intentional to obfuscating LU 23-0002 and its impacts on Waluga Park - West from the public and voters to suppress involvement and prevent backlash. Position 3: City’s Past Interpretation LoveLOParks SC asserts that Exhibit F-012, Staff Memo, dated February 17, 2021, and any other land use determinations regarding Springbrook Park and City Charter - Chapter X prior to the ratification of Measure 3-568 on November 2, 2021, are irrelevant and inadmissible and requests it be stricken from the record and the final LU 23-0002 Staff Report. Supporting Evidence: Any past interpretation of City Charter - Chapter X by the City prior to the ratification of Measure 3-568 on November 2, 2021, is irrelevant on the basis that the intentions of the original drafters and voters in 1978 (43 years prior) have no bearing on the intentions of voters in 2021. LoveLOParks SC and the voters intentions were formulated starting in November 2019 when we launch our plans for a citizen initiative; therefore, voters’ intentions are established since November 2019 by: •LoveLOParks SC, the architects of Chapter X and citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 •LoveLOParks execution of the 2020IN-1 petition signature campaign •4,433 certified petition signers of 2020IN-1 •LoveLOParks execution of the Measure 3-568 campaign, and •8,267 certified voters who ratified Measure 3-568 Position 4: City’s Current Interpretation LoveLOParks SC further asserts the LU 23-0002 Staff Report narrative regarding the City Charter (pages 10-13) are grossly false, inaccurate and misleading and request this fiction be stricken from the report in its entirety and inadmissible in subsequent proceedings. Supporting Evidence: The LU 23-0002 Staff Report narrative is disingenuous to the Lake Oswego community and a manipulation of the intent in City Charter - Chapter X. It is a desperate attempt to bend and twist the facts to promote and further City’s agenda, against its constituents, to further development regardless of the impact on sensitive lands and natural areas. It undemocratic and erodes truth in our institution. To be crystal clear, LoveLOParks SC rejects every statement expressed in the LU 23-0002 Staff Report regarding City Charter - Chapter X as a willful manipulation to subvert the Lake Oswego voters. We affirm, as the architects, that the full intent of City Charter - Chapter X is, and always has been, to prevent development inconsistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve. There’s no doubt that the 8,267 voters intent was to prohibit development in Nature Preserves. The City knows that City Charter - Chapter X is legally binding; otherwise, the City wouldn’t have executed a poorly constructed competing referendum which voters rejected. LoveLOParks SC intentionally chose “all development.” We purposely did not choose to phrase it “all development as defined in this Chapter.” The subsequent development limitations are independent and are purposefully included to address prior attempted and existing development in Nature Preserves by the City to ensure the City can’t use these as a precedent. And this was broadly communicated throughout our campaigns. Likewise, LoveLOParks SC intentionally chose “any road.” We purposely didn’t chose to add a distinction between “public” and “non-public,” like that of the City’s referendum that was rejected by voters. We also chose not to add adjectives like “dirt,” “asphalt,” “gravel,” or “temporary.” We meant “any road” and that was broadly communicated throughout our campaigns as well. But, LoveLOParks SC did intentionally provide guidance on hardscape trail prohibitions at the recommendation of the City’s Park Director to ensure natural hard surface materials, like decomposed granite, could be used: “…trails shall refrain from using hard surface materials, such as asphalt and concrete, in order to remain consistent with the natural conditions of a Nature Preserve.” LoveLOParks SC conducted an extensive 18-month outreach and education campaign to qualify citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 for the ballot. Citizen initiative petitions are governed by State statues that require the full legal text of the proposed law to: (a) accompany petition circulators and (b) included with e-sheet petitions. We sent the full legal text and informational aids to nearly every registered voter’s household (Exhibit A). LoveLOParks SC also conducted an extensive 4 month political campaign for Measure 3-568 (Exhibit B). For both 2020IN-1 and Measure 3-568, LoveLOPark’s communicated frequently and consistently with the community over multiple media channels for the “Protect Our Natural Parks” campaign: •LoveLOParks website* (https://www.loveloparks.org) •LoveLOParks social media channels* •Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/LoveLoParks/) •Twitter (https://twitter.com/LoveLOParks) •Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/loveloparks/) •NextDoor •NextDoor - Protect Our Natural Parks group (https://nextdoor.com/g/0kti6ij3f/) •Lake Oswego Review - ads, reader comments, citizen views (Exhibits A-3, B-6, B-7) •door-to-door •yards signs •quick reference guides (Exhibits A-4, A-5, B-1, B-2, B-3) •door hangers (Exhibit B-4) •informational flyers (Exhibits A-3, A-5) •direct mail (Exhibits A-1, A-4, A-5, B-1, B-2, B-3, B-5) •email subscribers * LoveLOParks website & social channels are the official record of all public communication for 2020IN-1 & Measure 3-568. Our timeline** with the LO community started in November 2019 and proceeded through November 2021: •November 4, 2019. Lake Theater public forum. LoveLOParks held an open public forum at the where the draft text of our citizen initiative was shared and feedback collected from members in the community. This public forum was publicly announced in: •the Lake Oswego Review for two weeks prior, weeks of October 20th and 27th, with a half- page color ad in the front section, and •Lake Theater’s billboard for leading up to the event •November 14, 2019. Citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 formally filed with the City. •December 12, 2019. Citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 certified by the City (Exhibit A-1) •December 17, 2019. Announced 2020IN-1 to City Council for Public Comment (Exhibit A-2) •December 12, 2019 - June 2021. 2020IN-1 campaign to collect petition signatures launched. •January 14, 2020 - 5000 registered voter households (~12,375 voters) •January 29, 2020 - LO Review Add (Exhibit A-3) •February 11, 2020 - 3,702 registered voter households (~6,648 voters) (Exhibits A-1, A-4) •October 2020 - June 2021 - 8,178 registered voter households (~13,544 voters) (Exhibits A-1, A-4) •August 2021 - November 2021. Measure 3-568 campaign launched •Direct mail to 2,750 certified Petition Signers households (Exhibits B-1) •Direct mail to 10,200 LO (~22,000 voters) registered voter households (Exhibits B-2) •Direct mail to 2,500 LO (~5000 voters) registered voter households (Exhibits B-3) •Door hangers placed on 5,000 LO resident doors (Exhibits B-4) •Postcards direct mail to 11,300 LO households (Exhibits B-5) ** A complete timeline of events can be viewed at: https://www.loveloparks.org/index.php/ causes/protect-our-natural-parks/about/timeline/ (Exhibit B-7) When it became evident the City would not be sharing the full text of their referendum to voters, LoveLOParks SC, not only published the referendum’s full text, but provided a side-by-side comparison that explained the significant differences and shared by all media channels, including direct mail, encouraging voters to visit our website to compare for themselves: https://www.loveloparks.org/compare As enumerated in Rationale 3, any determination on the knowledge, context, and intent of City Charter - Chapter X’s legal text originates back to November of 2019 with: •LoveLOParks SC, the architects of Chapter X and citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 •LoveLOParks execution of the 2020IN-1 petition signature campaign •4,433 certified petition signers of 2020IN-1 •LoveLOParks execution of the Measure 3-568 campaign, and •8,267 certified voters who ratified Measure 3-568 LoveLOParks SC’s intent is embodied in the very first limitation on development in City Charter - Chapter X - Section 43 - Limitations on Development: “The City of Lake Oswego shall insure that all development within a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area available for public enjoyment.” This mandatory limitation was broadly socialized in slogans, reader comments, and quick summaries with voters. While voters ratified November 2, 2021, our journey began with our citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 in November 2019. 2020IN-1 and was officially certified on December 12, 2019. It’s from December 12, 2021, voters intent must be assessed. LoveLOParks SC is confident that petition signers and voters were very aware their understanding of Chapter X and their intentions is to preserve our Nature Preserves as natural habitats and that LU 23-0002 is not aligned with their intent of ratifying Measure 3-568. Position 5: Willful Blindness Doctrine LoveLOParks SC asserts City Charter - Chapter X is land use regulation for Nature Preserves and that City Council has failed to execute their duty mandated by voters to direct City staff to consider City Charter - Chapter X for land use applications that may impact a Nature Preserve. The City’s willful failing to acknowledge City Charter - Chapter X in the “Community Development Code” appears to be an act of “Willful Blindness” (also referred to as “deliberate indifference,” “conscious avoidance,” or “ostrich”). Under the “Willful Blindness Doctrine”, the law is not concerned with why one remains ignorant when one could and should have known better, only that one does remain ignorant. It is a principle for imputing intent to someone’s actions. From this point of view, the City had the intention to do precisely what it has always done — ignore City Charter - Chapter X (with its mandate to preserve Nature Preserves) — in order to facilitate a private entity’s development. The Mayor, City Council, the City Manager and the City Attorney should know that provisions in the City Charter, such as City Charter - Chapter X, are applicable and supersede City Code, including the Community Development Code (Chapter 50) : •The City Charter defines the governing system for granting authority or rights and creating limitations on city powers and functions •The City Charter is the City’s constitution, and much like a constitution, the governing body (City Council) and City officers (City Manager and City Attorney) are legally bound to comply. •The City Charter implicitly retains superiority over City operations that are defined in code or ordinances (City Code); therefore City Code cannot override the City Charter; much in the same way that the US Congress can’t change the US Constitution. •The City Charter is only modifiable by a vote of the people. LoveLOParks SC purposely chose to maintain City Charter - Chapter X as a City Charter amendment to ensure park protections remained with voters, not the revolving door of City Council, and superior to City Code. This is precisely the reason the City chose to compete against citizen-initiated Measure 3-568 with a governing body- and developer- friendly referendum that was ultimately rejected by voters. Below are excerpts from the City Charter on the powers for City Council, the City Manager, and the City Attorney: https://www.codepublishing.com/OR/LakeOswego/?LakeOswegoCH/LakeOswegoCH.html Chapter 1. Lake Oswego Charter. Chapter III: Form of Government Section 6. Powers of the City Except as this Charter provides otherwise, all powers of the City are vested in the Council. Section 7. Councilors The Council is composed of a Mayor and six Councilors, all elected from the City at large. Section 8. Appointed City Officers The appointed City officers are the City Manager, City Attorney and Municipal Judge, each of whom serve at the pleasure of the Council and are appointed and removed by a majority vote of the entire Council. Compensation for an appointed City officer shall be fixed as the Council may direct. Chapter V. Power and Duties of Officers Section 20. City Manager B. The City Manager: 5. Shall make recommendations to the Council concerning the affairs of the City; 8. Shall provide for enforcement of all City laws and regulations; Section 20. City Manager A. The City Attorney shall: 2. Be the full time chief legal officer of the City and perform whatever duties consistent with this Charter are required by the Council; Chapter X. Park Development Limitation. The City appears to be narrowly defining “land use” regulations as those defined in Chapter 50 - Community Development Code. But, Chapter 50 is City Code. City Charter - Chapter X is City Charter. City Charter - Chapter X supersedes Chapter 50. The City’s “Land Use and Applications” webpage states: And, in the City Code for Chapter 50: 1. The editor’s note in 50.01 is incomplete. It fails to recognize that the City Charter may change from time to time, and much like state and federal laws, the City Chapter supersedes Chapter 50. 2. The “Applicability” item 50.01.002 is also incomplete. While Chapter 50 supersedes conflicts with the Lake Oswego Code (Chapters 10 thru 60), it fails to recognize that the City Charter (aka Chapter 1), inclusive of City Charter - Chapter X, supersedes conflicts in the Lake Oswego Code, including Chapter 50. 3. City Council, the City Manager, and City Attorney have blindly failed to provide adequate legal guidance to City staff with a clear legal definition for the “Community Development Code” that includes the City Charter - Chapter X. City Council has the mandate and authority to remedy this oversight and ensure City staff aren’t “blind” to City Charter - Chapter X when applying the Community Development Code. Much like Portland’s current efforts, “Aligning City Code with the Amended City Charter” (https:// www.portland.gov/transition/government/changing-roles/aligning-city-code-amended-city- charter), City Council should explicitly align City Charter - Chapter X with Chapter 50 to ensure the passage of time and changing City Councils, City officers and staff don’t fall victim to being willfully blind. Adding clarity can also prevent future conflict between Lake Oswego residents and the City. https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning/land-use-applications-and-cases “Development of real property within the corporate limits of the City of Lake Oswego shall be governed by the Community Development Code. All officials, departments, employees, and Commissions of the City vested with authority to issue permits or grant approvals shall adhere to and require conformance with the Code.” https://www.codepublishing.com/OR/LakeOswego/?LakeOswego50/LakeOswego50.html 50.01 Title and Purpose … “[Editor’s Note: From time to time, new state and federal laws, regulations, or court decisions are issued. The reader is advised that federal or state law may be determined to supersede portions of this Community Development Code, either generally or as applied to a specific situation.]” 50.01.002 Application of Code 1. Applicability. Development of real property within the corporate limits of the City of Lake Oswego shall be governed by this Code. All provisions in other sections of the Lake Oswego Code which conflict with applicable provisions of this Code are hereby superseded.” A natural and reasonable addition to Chapter 50 would be to create a “Nature Preserve Overlay District” in 50.05.013 that references City Charter - Chapter X regulations. LoveLOParks SC intentionally chose “Nature Preserve” to not overlap and conflict with terms frequently used in the City Code. A “Nature Preserve Overlay District” might look something like the following in Chapter 50: 50.05.013 Nature Preserve Overlay District 1. Purpose The purpose of the Nature Preserve (NP) Overlay District is to insure Code compliance with "Chapter X. Park Development Limitation” (Chapter X) in “Chapter 1. Lake Oswego Charter” (City Charter) for all city owned property designated as a Nature Preserve in Chapter X and in this section. All development in a Nature Preserve must be consistent with preserving a Nature Preserve as a natural area. 2. Applicability This section applies to: a. All Nature Preserves defined in City Charter Chapter X - Section 42 b. Additional city owned property declared a Nature Preserve by ordinance (see City Charter Chapter X - Section 46 Application to Other Park): i. None All provisions in other sections of the Lake Oswego Code, including Chapter 50, which conflict with applicable provisions of City Charter Chapter X are hereby superseded. 3. Site Development Limitations a. All “Limitations on Development” in City Charter Chapter X - Section 43. b. Maximum Height of Structures in Residential Areas in City Charter Chapter X - Section 46A. 4. Immutability This section is immutable except where allowed by City Charter Chapter X - Section 46. Exhibit A 2020IN-1 Artifacts Exhibit A-1 Prospective Petition : Protect Lake Oswego's natural parks for the enjoyment of all residents, visitors & future generations _____________________________________________________________________________________ [Attachment] This initiative repeals and replaces “Chapter X - Park Development Limitations” in Lake Oswego’s City Charter, Chapter 1, with expanded limitations for ﬁfteen natural parks, including Springbrook Park, and recommits the Lake Oswego community to protecting these natural areas with development limited to only that necessary for the enjoyment of these open spaces. Chapter 1 - LAKE OSWEGO CHARTER CHAPTER X. PARK DEVELOPMENT LIMITATION Section 41. Purpose. The purpose of this Chapter is to preserve Springbrook Park (and any other parks which may be designated as subject to this Chapter) all designated Nature Preserves that are owned by the City of Lake Oswego, inclusive of the ﬁfteen natural parks speciﬁed in this Chapter, as natural areas for the enjoyment of all residents of and visitors to Lake Oswego. This Chapter shall be interpreted liberally to achieve this purpose. (Amended November 7, 1978.) Section 42. Deﬁnitions. As used in this Chapter: Athletic Facility means any area, ﬁeld, or building which is graded, leveled, constructed, or equipped for use in sports or athletics. Fields for baseball, soccer, or football and courts of tennis are examples of Athletic Facilities. Telecommunications Facility means any area, ﬁeld, or building which is graded, leveled, constructed, or equipped for use in telecommunications or broadband communication. Antennas, Cellular Towers, Radio Masts and Towers, Satellite Dishes, and Emergency Communications Systems are examples of Telecommunications Facilities. This includes Telecommunications Facilities for both public or private use. Bryant Woods Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Bryant Woods Park” (19.7 acres, more or less, to the North of Childs Road located at the corner of Childs Road and Canal Road at 4301 Childs Road). Canal Acres means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Canal Acres” (27.3 acres, more or less, to the South of Childs Road, to the West of Canal Road, and to the East of Sycamore Avenue, located at 19300 Canal Road). Cooks Butte Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Cooks Butte Park” (43 acres, more or less, located at 2100 Palisades Crest Drive). Cornell Natural Area means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Cornell Natural Area” (3.2 acres, more or less, to the East of Cornell Street, to the South of Larch Street, located at 16920 Cornell Street). Page of 1 4 Petition ID: 2020IN-1 Prospective Petition : Protect Lake Oswego's natural parks for the enjoyment of all residents, visitors & future generations _____________________________________________________________________________________ Glennmorrie Greenway means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Glennmorrie Greenway” (1.3 acres, more or less, to the East of Paciﬁc Hwy, to the North of Glennmorrie Terrace, located at 16540 Paciﬁc Hwy). Hallinan Woods means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Hallinan Woods” (3.8 acres, more or less, located at 1103 Obrien Street). Iron Mountain Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Iron Mountain Park” (51 acres, more or less, to the North of Iron Mountain Blvd, located at 2401 Iron Mountain Blvd). Kerr Open Space means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Kerr Open Space” (10 acres, more or less, to the South of SW Stevenson Street, to East of Grouse Terrace, to the North of Walking Woods Drive, to the West of Icarus Loop) Lamont Springs Natural Area means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Lamont Springs Natural Area” (0.5 acres, more ore less, to the South of Lakeview Blvd, and to the East of Bryant Road, at the corner of Lakeview Blvd and Bryant Road, located at 4600 Lakeview Drive). River Run means the park land comprised of two parcels (River Run East and River Run West), owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “River Run” (10.8 acres, more or less, to the East of Canal Road, to the North of the Tualatin River, located at 19690 River Run Drive and 3770 Rivers Edge Drive). Southshore Natural Area means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Southshore Natural Area" (9.2 acres, more or less, located at 1201 South Shore Blvd). Springbrook Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Springbrook Park" (52 acres, more or less, to the South of Country Club Road, to the West and North of Wembley Park Road, and to the East of Boones Ferry Road). The term "Springbrook Park" does not include the City of Lake Oswego existing indoor tennis facility and adjoining parking lot. Stevens Meadows means the two park lands owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Stevens Meadows” and the “Stevens Homestead” (27.8 acres, more or less, located at 18600 Shipley Drive and 1551 Childs Road, respectively). Waluga Park - West means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as "Waluga Park - West" (22.8 acres, more or less, to the East of Inverurie Drive, to the North of SW Oakridge Road, to the West of Waluga Drive). Woodmont Natural Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Woodmont Natural Park” (6.8 acres, more or less, at the corner of Atwater Rd and Atwater Lane, located at 13600 Atwater Lane). Nature Preserve means natural area parks or open spaces owned by the City of Lake Oswego that are managed or maintained to retain their natural condition and prevent habitat deterioration. Nature Preserves that are subject to the limitations of this Chapter, which upon ratiﬁcation will initially include, Bryant Woods Park, Canal Acres, Cornell Natural Area, Cooks Butte Park, Glennmorrie Greenway, Hallinan Woods, Iron Mountain Park, Kerr Open Space, Lamont Springs Natural Area, River Run, Southshore Natural Area, Springbrook Park, Stevens Meadows, Waluga Park - West, and Woodmont Natural Park. Page of 2 4 Petition ID: 2020IN-1 Prospective Petition : Protect Lake Oswego's natural parks for the enjoyment of all residents, visitors & future generations _____________________________________________________________________________________ Section 43. Limitations on Development. The City of Lake Oswego shall insure that all development within Springbrook Park a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of Springbrook Park a Nature Preserve as a natural area available for public enjoyment. To facilitate public access and use, the City of Lake Oswego may build trails for hiking, jogging, horseback and bicycle riding, may provide benches and interpretive displays, and may provide picnic and sanitary facilities within Springbrook Park a Nature Preserve. To access and use particularly fragile habitats, boardwalks may be built; however, trails shall refrain from using hard surface materials, such as asphalt and concrete, in order to remain consistent with the natural conditions of a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall not construct or develop (or allow any person to construct or develop) any Athletic Facility, any Telecommunications Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles within Springbrook Park a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall not cut (or allow any person to cut) any tree in Springbrook Park a Nature Preserve for the purpose of facilitating the construction or development of any Athletic Facility, any Telecommunications Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles. The City of Lake Oswego shall not construct or develop (or allow any person to construct or develop) any facility or any structure above ground that would impair or be inconsistent with the natural conditions of a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall not cut (or allow any person to cut) any tree in a Nature Preserve for the purpose of commercial logging. The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to maintain (or allow any person to maintain) a Nature Preserve for the purposes of ecological restoration that provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates ﬁre hazards. The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to maintain (or allow any person to maintain) any existing facility or existing structure, or any existing parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles in a Nature Preserve constructed before (date initiative is ratiﬁed) that is above ground as long as that facility or structure, or parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles is not altered in any manner that would further impair or be inconsistent with the natural conditions of a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to implement (or allow any person to implement) a park master plan for a Nature Preserve that was adopted before (date initiative is ratiﬁed). (Amended November 7, 1978.) Section 44. Effective Date. This Chapter carries an effective date of November 7, 1978 (date initiative is ratiﬁed). Section 45. Severability. If a court should hold invalid or unconstitutional any clause or part of this Chapter, that holding shall not affect the remaining parts of this Chapter which are not held invalid or unconstitutional. Page of 3 4 Petition ID: 2020IN-1 Prospective Petition : Protect Lake Oswego's natural parks for the enjoyment of all residents, visitors & future generations _____________________________________________________________________________________ Section 46. Application to Other Park. This Chapter shall apply to any other park (i) conveyed by property owners to the City of Lake Oswego with a “Nature Preserve” designation that shall carry with the property in perpetuity, (ii) nominated by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Board and/or the Director of Parks and Recreation designating such other park as a “Nature Preserve” and ratiﬁed by the City Council, (iii) ratiﬁed by voters speciﬁcally designating such other park as a “Nature Preserve”, or (iv) acquired by a bond issue after the effective date of this Chapter if (and only if) the voters speciﬁcally designate such other park as subject to this Chapter. If any other park is designated as subject to this Chapter, then this Chapter shall apply to that park and if its name (preceded by the word “or” "and") were added after Springbrook Park throughout Section 43 to the Nature Preserve deﬁnition of this Chapter. (Amended November 7, 1978 [Note: from November 7, 1978 until June 30, 1980, this Chapter was numbered XXV and included Sections 102 through 107]; Renumbered Chapter on July 1, 1980.) Section 46A. Maximum Height of Structures in Residential Areas. The City of Lake Oswego shall neither construct nor allow the construction of any structure which is more than 50 feet in height within a residential zone, except for the construction of a single symbolic appurtenance of a structure to 75 foot height. The City may, however, construct or allow the construction of a lighting structure which is more than 50 feet in height in a public park or school sports ﬁelds located in a residential zone. For purposes of this section the height of a structure or of a part or appurtenance of a structure shall be measured from the ground or sidewalk surface within a 5-foot horizontal distance of the exterior of the structure, provided such sidewalk or ground surface is not more than 10 feet above the lowest grade as deﬁned by city ordinance; or, if such sidewalk or ground surface is more than 10 feet above lowest grade, height shall be measured from a point 10 feet higher than the lowest grade, to the top of the highest element of the building or structure. (Amended May 19, 1987; March 24, 1992.) Page of 4 4 Petition ID: 2020IN-1 Exhibit A-2 City Council - Citizen Comment - December 17, 2019 Prospective Petition Initiative - 2020IN-1 Hello. I’m Scott Handley, a Palisades Neighborhood resident. I’m the Chief Petitioner for the community-led petition initiative, 2020IN-1, to “protect Lake Oswego’s natural parks for residents, visitors, and future generations.” This prospective initiative amends Lake Oswego’s Charter Chapter X - Park Development Limitation. Chapter X - Park Development Limitation was enacted in 1978 by a similar community-led ballot initiative to “preserve Springbrook Park as a natural area.” It prevented Springbrook Park from being developed into an athletic facility. The community voted 3-1 in-favor to preserve Springbrook Park. Not long ago, Chapter X protected Springbrook Park, again, when the City considered plans to expand the Tennis Center into this natural area. Springbrook Park is the only natural park subject to Chapter X today. Our initiative extends Chapter X to include 15 additional City designated natural area parks, in 9 neighborhood associations, comprising of approximately 290 acres of natural and open space land, while strengthening limitations on development that is incompatible and inconsistent with their natural conditions, prohibiting commercial logging in these natural areas, allowing improvements to maintain safe and healthy ecosystems for wildlife, ﬂora, and fauna to thrive in their natural habitat and for residents to enjoy, and expanding the methods to include additional parks in the future. These 15 natural areas are small and intertwined into the fabric of our neighborhoods and our community. Their ecosystems are host to abundant wildlife that give many in the community refuge and respite from the increasingly developed world that surrounds our tree-canopied city. Several of these natural areas were gifts to the community by families who saw our innate human desire to develop these lands and they wished them to remain forever wild. The community should be guaranteed these pockets of nature are left to remain as healthy ecosystems in their natural condition. Our initiative, 2020IN-1, does just that. The community preserved Springbrook Park, we must now preserve these 15 natural parks too. While some say our effort is misguided, our effort stands on ﬁrm ground. It is a response to past actions and inactions. This initiative and the 15 natural parks it protects are the result of research and community outreach efforts. It honors the wishes of family’s whom deeded natural areas to this community. While a few leaders have chosen not to participate, far more have offered their encouragement, support, and input. I invite our City Councilors to discuss, collaborate, and embrace this common sense natural park preservation initiative. These protections should not be exclusive to Springbrook Park. Such protections are emphasized in decades of City parks plans; the Open Space Plan adopted in 2001 laid out a blueprint to protect heritage landscapes while no action has been taken; the Parks Plan 2025 adopted in 2012 highlights the overwhelming importance of these natural areas to the community through their outreach programs. It’s time to codify protections guaranteeing these natural areas can never be developed upon, keeping Lake Oswego’s legacy as the Tree City intact for generations to come. It is the moral and right thing to do. It will restore goodwill and faith with our community. In closing… While the ballot title, “Restricts improvements on certain Lake Oswego park properties,” assigned by the City may be imperfect, the Charter revisions proposed by our initiative are crystal clear, as they were for Springbrook Park in 1978. Our initiative “Protects 15 Lake Oswego natural parks as nature preserves limiting development that is inconsistent and incompatible with their natural conditions.” Thank you. Exhibit A-3 We NEED Your Signature To Put Our Citizen-led Initiative On The Ballot   PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS Our Community Should Decide and Vote WHO: WHAT: WHERE: WHY: WHEN: HOW: DOWNLOAD OFFICIAL PETITION E-SHEET & SIGN  http://LoveLOParks.org/petition SIGN THE OFFICIAL PETITION E-SHEET TO PUT OUR CITIZEN-LED INITIATIVE ON THE BALLOT    4,365 LO VOTER SIGNATURES TO QUALIFY!!! MAIL PETITION BACK AS SOON AS POSSIBLE! PROTECT 15 NATURAL PARKS AS NATURAL HABITATS FOR ALL TO ENJOY FOR GENERATIONS TO COME BY IMPOSING SENSIBLE DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS. DOWNLOAD PETITION - PRINT - SIGN - MAIL BACK http://LoveLOParks.org/petition GET INFORMED. GET THE FACTS. http://LoveLOParks.org EVERY LAKE OSWEGO REGISTERED VOTER BRYANT WOODS, CANAL ACRES, COOKS BUTTE, CORNELL NATURAL AREA, GLENNMORRIE GREENWAY, HALLINAN WOODS, IRON MOUNTAIN, KERR OPEN SPACE, LAMONT SPRINGS NATURAL AREA, RIVER RUN, SOUTHSHORE NATURAL AREA, SPRINGBROOK PARK, STEVENS MEADOWS, WALUGA PARK-WEST, AND WOODMONT NATURAL PARK LET’S MAKE A POSITIVE DIFFERENCE! LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!    SIGN & MAIL the PETITION, then DECIDE & VOTE! Exhibit A-4 Lake Oswego City CharterChapter X - Park Development LimitationInitiative vs Current Quick ReferenceINITIATIVE 2020IN-1 Chapter XCURRENT Chapter X (Enacted by initiative in 1978)Ballot CaptionRestricts improvements on certain Lake Oswego parks propertiesPreserves Springbrook Park as a Natural AreaWhat City Natural Parks are included? 2020IN-1 Defines These Natural Areas As “Nature Preserves”• Springbrook Park • Bryant Woods Park • Canal Acres • Cooks Butte Park • Cornell Natural Area • Glennmorrie Greenway • Hallinan Woods • Iron Mountain Park • Kerr Open Space• Lamont Springs NA • River Run • Southshore Natural Area • Stevens Homestead • Stevens Meadows • West Waluga Park • Woodmont Natural Park• Springbrook ParkWhat’s Allowed?Development consistent with preservation as a natural areaDevelopment consistent with preservation as a natural areaThe distinction of MAY provides City ability to apply on a park-by-park basis through planning and/or City code.Public Access & Use, City MAY Provide: • Trails for Hiking, Jogging,   Horseback, and Bicycle Riding • Picnic Facilities • Sanitary Facilities• Benches • Interpretive Displays • Boardwalks in Sensitive AreasFor Public Access & Use, City MAY Provide: • Trails for Hiking, Jogging, Horseback, and Bicycle Riding • Picnic Facilities • Sanitary FacilitiesCity still must produce missing park-specific Master & Management Plans.Improvements & Maintenance: • Accessible and Safe to Public • Ecological Restoration • Healthy Habitat for Wildlife• Eliminate Invasive Species • Restore Native Species • Mitigate Fire HazardsMaintain existing structure or facility, or parking lot, road or trail for motorized vehicle without further impairment to natural conditions Implement existing adopted Park Master PlansWhat’s Prohibited?  Exempt: Existing facilities, trails, parking lots & those specified in adopted Master Plans.The City SHALL NOT Construct: • Athletic Facilities • Parking Lots • Road or Trail for Motorized Vehicles• Telecommunications  Facilities • Hardscape Trails  (Asphalt / Concrete) • Commercial LoggingThe City SHALL NOT Construct: • Athletic Facilities • Parking Lots • Road or Trail for Motorized Vehicles Developing any above ground structure or facility inconsistent with or impairs the natural conditionsHow to Include Other City Natural Parks?Acquired by bond where voters explicitly designate park to chapter Property owner conveys property to the City as a “Nature Preserve” Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resource Advisory Board nominates park as a “Nature Preserve” to City Council for ratification Parks and Recreation Director nominates park as a “Nature Preserve” to City Council for ratification Voters designate park as a “Nature Preserve” by ballot initiativeAcquired by bond where voters explicitly designate park to chapter Lake Oswego City Charter :Chapter X - Park Development Limitation Quick Reference INITIATIVE 2020IN-1 Ballot Caption: Restricts improvements on certain Lake Oswego park properties (assigned by City Attorney) EXISTING (since 1978)Ballot Caption: Preserves Springbrook Park as a Natural (assigned after a community appealed) What Natural Parks are included? • Springbrook Park (52 acres) - 2 • Bryant Woods Park (19.7 acres) - 1,2,3 • Canal Acres (27.3 acres) - 1,2,3 • Cooks Butte Park (43 acres) - 2,3,5 • Cornell Natural Area (3.2 acres) - 4 • Glennmorrie Greenway (1.3 acres) - 4 • Hallinan Woods (3.8 acres) - 2 • Iron Mountain Park (51 acres) - 1,3 • Kerr Open Space (10 acres) - 4 What’s Allowed?• Development consistent with the preservation as a natural area For Public Access & Use, City MAY Provide (not shall):   • Trails for Hiking, Jogging, Horseback, and Bicycle Riding • Picnic Facilities • Sanitary Facilities  • Benches • Interpretive Displays • Boardwalks in Sensitive Areas Improvements & Maintenance:  • Accessible and Safe to Public  • Ecological Restoration • Healthy Habitat for Wildlife • Eliminate Invasive Species • Restore Native Species • Mitigate Fire Hazards • Maintain existing structure, facility, or parking lot, road or trail for motorized vehicle without further impairment to natural conditions • Implement existing adopted Park Master Plans Note: Park-specific Master Plans and/or City Code still required to define allowable uses and trail types.  Note: Park-specific Management Plans still required to address threats and maintenance needs to preserve healthy and safe natural habitats. What’s Prohibited?The City SHALL NOT Construct: • Athletic Facilities • Parking Lots • Roads or Trails for Motorized Vehicles  • Telecommunications Facilities • Hardscape Trails (Asphalt / Concrete) • Cutting any tree FOR THE PURPOSE of Commercial Logging   • Developing any above ground structure or facility inconsistent with or impairs the natural conditions Note: Existing facilities, trails, parking lots & those specified in existing, adopted Master Plans are exempt.  Note: Decomposed granite is commonly used as an ADA-compliant, natural material for national, state, and city park wilderness trails. Process to Include Other City Natural Parks? • Acquired by bond where voters explicitly designate a park to Chapter X • Property owner may convey property to the City as a “Nature Preserve” • Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resource Advisory Board may nominate a park as a “Nature Preserve” to City Council for ratification • Parks and Recreation Director may nominate a park as a “Nature Preserve” to City Council for ratification • Voters designate a park as a “Nature Preserve” by ballot initiative Notes: Defines these as “Nature Preserves” for purposes of Chapter X - Park Development Limitation.   1- natural area with adopted park Master Plan* 2- existing or access to parking, avail. street parking 3- existing adopted Master Plan includes parking* 4- size / geography likely unsuitable for parking 5- master plan created but not adopted* *based on published documents from City website • Lamont Springs NA (0.5 acres) - 4 • River Run (10.8 acres) - 1,2,3 • South Shore Natural Area (9.2 acres) - 4 • Stevens Homestead (5.7 acres) - 1,3 • Stevens Meadows (20.1 acres) - 2,3 • West Waluga Park (22.8 acres) - 2 • Woodmont Natural Park (6.8 acres) - 1,3 Exhibit A-5 . .. . , „.. ,, ,„, _ .. a l - . 0 _ : . . , . ,„.,„ 4. ,.„, r:i . pt.. = g . %'.:. " . • P4 A i ICC Bryant Woods Canal Acres Cooks Butte 1:1= m (7), 3 11 TIT-Flo 6.)- _. 7 , .,', „Ifi!'.; ,', ' •: }, vII I 1771 (1 D ELTho T 7r g p- ?:_l TER • What is the natural park protection initiative? i Hallman A city charter amendment limiting development cco Woods N inconsistent with maintaining 15 natural parks as = s i, , x t $::, healthy and safe natural habitats for wildlife to •' flourish and accessible for public enjoyment. ti • ' ' ', ' ft_ Why do these natural parks need protection? The city's long history in considering development C=1 Y - s ` in our natural parks requiring the community to • Lamont spend time, effort, and money to protect them. Springs CZ c ` iift ....".... , Why is a charter amendment the best way to W c .;:41 4 protect our natural parks? m .' s A city charter amendment provides a legal guarantee that voters will have the right to decide 0 • any future development in these natural parks. ill a Springbrook o`3s+ _�A l TIE P DLflL iI\IL7 ter. _ .- i 1111., 7...„ :4) 1100.460. - . Iron-Mountain '. -River Run " Stevens Meadow:.- 41- �IiPi 1Jct Lake Oswego City Charter :Chapter X - Park Development Limitation Quick Reference INITIATIVE 2020IN-1 Ballot Caption: Restricts improvements on certain Lake Oswego park properties (assigned by City Attorney) EXISTING (since 1978)Ballot Caption: Preserves Springbrook Park as a Natural Area (assigned after community appealed) What Natural Parks are included? • Springbrook Park (52 acres) - 2 • Bryant Woods Park (19.7 acres) - 1,2,3 • Canal Acres (27.3 acres) - 1,2,3 • Cooks Butte Park (43 acres) - 2,3,5 • Cornell Natural Area (3.2 acres) - 4 • Glennmorrie Greenway (1.3 acres) - 4 • Hallinan Woods (3.8 acres) - 2 • Iron Mountain Park (51 acres) - 1,3 • Kerr Open Space (10 acres) - 4 What’s Allowed?• Development consistent with the preservation as a natural area For Public Access & Use, City MAY Provide (not shall): • Trails for Hiking, Jogging, Horseback, and Bicycle Riding • Picnic Facilities • Sanitary Facilities • Benches • Interpretive Displays • Boardwalks in Sensitive Areas Improvements & Maintenance: • Accessible and Safe to Public • Ecological Restoration • Healthy Habitat for Wildlife • Eliminate Invasive Species • Restore Native Species • Mitigate Fire Hazards • Maintain existing structure, facility, or parking lot, road or trail for motorized vehicle without further impairment to natural conditions • Implement existing adopted Park Master Plans Note: Park-specific Master Plans and/or City Code still required to define allowable uses and trail types. Note: Park-specific Management Plans still required to address threats and maintenance needs to preserve healthy and safe natural habitats. What’s Prohibited?The City SHALL NOT Construct: • Athletic Facilities • Parking Lots • Roads or Trails for Motorized Vehicles • Telecommunications Facilities • Hardscape Trails (Asphalt / Concrete) • Cutting any tree FOR THE PURPOSE of Commercial Logging • Developing any above ground structure or facility inconsistent with or impairs the natural conditions Note: Existing facilities, trails, parking lots & those specified in existing, adopted Master Plans are exempt. Note: Decomposed granite is commonly used as an ADA-compliant, natural material for national, state, and city park wilderness trails. Process to Include Other City Natural Parks? • Acquired by bond where voters explicitly designate a park to Chapter X • Property owner may convey property to the City as a “Nature Preserve” • Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resource Advisory Board may nominate a park as a “Nature Preserve” to City Council for ratification • Parks and Recreation Director may nominate a park as a “Nature Preserve” to City Council for ratification • Voters designate a park as a “Nature Preserve” by ballot initiative Notes: Defines these as “Nature Preserves” for purposes of Chapter X - Park Development Limitation. 1- natural area with adopted park Master Plan* 2- existing or access to parking, avail. street parking 3- existing adopted Master Plan includes parking* 4- size / geography likely unsuitable for parking 5- master plan created but not adopted* *based on published documents from City website • Lamont Springs NA (0.5 acres) - 4 • River Run (10.8 acres) - 1,2,3 • South Shore Natural Area (9.2 acres) - 4 • Stevens Homestead (5.7 acres) - 1,3 • Stevens Meadows (20.1 acres) - 2,3 • West Waluga Park (22.8 acres) - 2 • Woodmont Natural Park (6.8 acres) - 1,3 DONATE NATURAL AREAS HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS (2020IN-1) » NATURAL AREAS Previous Page Timeline Next Page Park Protections Lake Oswego has ~460 acres of designated natural areas out of ~900 acres of park land. Our citizen initiative, 2020IN-1, protects 15 designated natural area or open space parks in 9 neighborhood associations, totaling ~290 acres with abundant wildlife, Vora, and fauna for residents, visitors, and future generations to enjoy. These 15 natural areas are small and intertwined into the fabric of our neighborhoods and our community. Their ecosystems are host to abundant wildlife that give many in the community refuge and respite from the increasingly developed world that surrounds our tree-canopied city. Several of these natural areas were gifts to the community by families who saw our innate human desire to develop these lands and they wished them to remain forever wild. The community should be guaranteed these pockets of nature are left to remain free from development that is inconsistent with maintaining them as natural habitats. Our citizen initiative, 2020IN-1, does just that. *Not pictured: Cornell Natural Area, Glennmorie Greenway, Kerr Open Space, Waluga – West, Woodmont Park. Send us your pictures to: info@loveloparks.org Our initiative is a 100% grassroots, citizen-led petition initiative, 2020IN-1, effort seeking to amends the existing Charter Chapter X – Park Development Limitation in Lake Oswego’s city charter to Protect Lake Oswego’s natural parks for residents, visitors, and future generations. Chapter X – Park Development Limitation was enacted in 1978 by a similar citizen-led ballot initiative to “preserve Springbrook Park as a natural area.” It prevented Springbrook Park from being developed into an athletic facility. The citizens voted 3-1 in-favor to preserve Springbrook Park. Not long ago, Chapter X protected Springbrook Park, again, when the City considered plans to expand the Tennis Center into this natural area. Springbrook Park is the only natural park subject to Chapter X today. The community preserved Springbrook Park in 1978, we must now preserve these 15 natural parks too. AND, 10 natural parks below are WITHOUT adopted master plans, leaving them vulnerable to development inconsistent and incompatible to their natural conditions. The following natural parks were identihed through the City’s Parks and Recreation website and outreach efforts to members in our community in October 2019 and early November 2019 who responded to requests for feedback: Residents Neighborhood Association Chairs (past and current) Members of Friends Groups Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Advisory Board Members Director of Parks and Recreation Park Acres Info Bryant Woods Park Bryant Neighborhood 19.7 Master Plan (2001) Trail Map Canal Acres Childs Neighborhood 27.3 Master Plan (2001) Cooks Butte Park Palisades Neighborhood 43 Deed Aldavit Management Plan (2008) Master Plan (1980s) – Not Adopted Trail Plan (2010) Trail Map Save Cooks Butte Stevens Meadows Trailhead Cornell Natural Area Hallinan Neighborhood 3.2 Glennmorrie Greenway Glennmorrie Neighborhood 1.3 Hallinan Woods Hallinan Neighborhood 3.8 Friends of Hallinan Heights Woods Iron Mountain Park Lake Grove Neighborhood 51 Master Plan (2017) Resolution 17-42 (2017) Master Plan (1984) Restoration Plan (2013) Friends of Iron Mountain Park Kerr Open Space 10 Lamont Springs Natural Area Bryant Neighborhood 0.5 River Run Childs Neighborhood 10.8 Master Plan (2001) Southshore Natural Area Palisades Neighborhood 9.2 Springbrook Park Uplands Neighborhood 52 Ballot Title – Resolution R-78-53 (1978) City Charter – Park Development Limitation (1978) Trail Map Friends of Springbrook Park Stevens Meadows (includes Stevens Homestead)27.8 Site Plan Trailhead Waluga Park – West Lake Forest Neighborhood 22.8 Friends of Waluga Parks Woodmont Natural Park Forest Highlands Neighborhood 6.8 Deed Master Plan (2017) Friends of Woodmont Park Last updated: Dec 28, 2019 Previous Page Timeline Next Page Park Protections STAY INFORMED WITH THE FACTS SUBSCRIBE Love LO Parks is a Lake Oswego grassroots citizen-led coalition striving to protect our natural parks from future development and promoting their maintenance to preserve them as vibrant and healthy natural habitats for residents, visitors, and future generations to enjoy. Copyright 2019-21 Love LO Parks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT CAUSES NEWS POSTER SUBSCRIBE DONATE PARK PROTECTIONS HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS (2020IN-1) » PARK PROTECTIONS Previous Page Natural Areas Next Page Charter Amendment Springbrook Park is the ONLY natural area protected. Our initiative adds 15 additional natural parks to the City Charter. The City of Lake Oswego has had decades to enact sensible development limitations in the Lake Oswego Code for our natural area and open spaces. The code pertaining to Parks and Natural Areas (PNA) and Sensitive Lands (SL) fails to adequately prevent Conditional Use Permit applications, leaving many natural areas and open spaces vulnerable and at risk to habitat destruction from the development of structures and/or facilities inconsistent with a natural area. The Conditional Use Permit process requires the community to be actively involved in City Council sessions and subsequently engaged in a lengthy, costly, time-consuming, and reactive development review process just to defend our natural areas — that should, otherwise, be guaranteed protected from such activities. And, while some natural areas have deeded covenants and restrictions, these are also limited or are vulnerable to the City and special interests. The Parks and Recreation department, over several decades, has documented the Lake Oswego community’s interest in preserving these natural areas and open spaces in their Comprehensive Park Plans. In many cases, these plans map out actions to our City for protecting the Xnite resources…while the City has failed to act to protect and preserve them. Parks & Recreation Department Park Plans Lake Oswego Open Space Plan (2001)Plan Lake Oswego Trails & Pathways (2003)Master Plan Trail Map Lake Oswego Parks Plan 2025 (2012)System Plan Time’s up! Recent events at Cooks Butte has exposed, once again, the vulnerability of our natural areas. The City has failed to enact sensible restrictions in the City Code and has failed to develop many park-speciXc master plans. Without legal protection, some people will continue to see opportunity to develop them. That’s why WE must take action to protect them NOW! We can protect our natural areas by adding sensible development limitations for our natural parks directly into the City Charter. Charter protections will protect these natural areas until the community decides otherwise but our vote. Our path has been paved already by the Lake Oswego community. In 1978, Springbrook Park was under threats to urbanization and development. The City planned to develop this natural area into a major athletic facility. The residents and community were unhappy with those plans and enacted by ballot measure “Chapter X – Park Development Limitation” in the City’s Charter. This chapter has since protected Springbrook Park. In fact, recently the City, once again, planned to expand the Tennis Center into Springbrook Park — violating Chapter X. The City, being reminded of this legal protection, had to reconsider and back off. Unfortunately, Chapter X speciXcally only protects Springbrook Park. And, speciXcally only from Athletic Facilities, parking lots, and paved roads. These protections should not be exclusive to Springbrook Park. Such protections are emphasized in decades of City parks plans: Open Space Plan. Adopted in 2001, this plan laid out a blueprint to protect heritage landscapes while no action has been taken by the City. Parks Plan 2025. Adopted in 2012, this plan highlights the overwhelming importance of these natural areas to the community through their outreach programs. It’s time to codify protections guaranteeing these natural areas can never be developed upon, keeping Lake Oswego’s legacy as the Tree City intact for generations to come. It’s the right thing to do! Our prospective initiative enhances Chapter X with additional limitations, additional natural areas and open spaces, and provide a vehicle to include more parks in the future. Protections The revised Chapter X deXnes a “Nature Preserve” and those parks subject to that deXnition. Nature Preserves are subject to the following allowed and prohibited development limitations: Allowed The City MAY provide: Trails for hiking, jogging, horseback, and bicycle riding Benches and interpretive displays Picnic and sanitary facilities Boardwalks to access particularly fragile habitats Park maintenance for purposes of ecological restoration that: provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment provides a healthy habitat for wildlife eliminates invasive species restores native species mitigates Xre hazards Maintain: pre-existing facility or pre-existing structure any existing parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles Implement pre-existing adopted Park-speciXc Master Plans, such as: Canal Woods, Bryant Woods, & River Run Iron Mountain Stevens Homestead Woodmont Natural Park Not Allowed Any Athletic Facility Any Telecommunications Facility Any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles Cutting any tree for the purpose of facilitating the construction or development of : any Athletic Facility any Telecommunications Facility any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles New trails with hard surface materials made from asphalt and concrete. Constructing or developing any facility or any structure above ground that would impair or be inconsistent with the natural conditions. Cutting any tree for the purpose of commercial logging. Last updated: Jan 16, 2020 Previous Page Natural Areas Next Page Charter Amendment STAY INFORMED WITH THE FACTS SUBSCRIBE Love LO Parks is a Lake Oswego grassroots citizen-led coalition striving to protect our natural parks from future development and promoting their maintenance to preserve them as vibrant and healthy natural habitats for residents, visitors, and future generations to enjoy. Copyright 2019-21 Love LO Parks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT CAUSES NEWS POSTER SUBSCRIBE DONATE CHARTER AMENDMENT HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS (2020IN-1) » CHARTER AMENDMENT Previous Page Park Protections Next Page Frequently Asked Questions Our community-led ballot initiative revises “Chapter X – Park Development Limitation” in Lake Oswego’s City Charter, Chapter 1. Chapter X was added to the City’s Charter in 1978 by a community ballot initiative to “preserve Springbrook Park as a natural area.” The community voted 3-1 in favor of this charter amendment to preserve Springbrook Park. The City’s Charter is its constitution. A Charter Amendment codi^es the rules the City must abide by to the community it represents. To assist in your review of the initiative’s text, we have provided a summary for your reference: Quick Reference ··· Chapter 1 – LAKE OSWEGO CHARTER CHAPTER X. PARK DEVELOPMENT LIMITATION Section 41. Purpose. The purpose of this Chapter is to preserve all designated Nature Preserves that are owned by the City of Lake Oswego, inclusive of the ^fteen natural parks speci^ed in this Chapter, as natural areas for the enjoyment of all residents of and visitors to Lake Oswego. This Chapter shall be interpreted liberally to achieve this purpose. (Amended November 7, 1978.) −Section 42. Definitions. As used in this Chapter: Athletic Facility means any area, ^eld, or building which is graded, leveled, constructed, or equipped for use in sports or athletics. Fields for baseball, soccer, or football and courts of tennis are examples of Athletic Facilities. Telecommunications Facility means any area, ^eld, or building which is graded, leveled, constructed, or equipped for use in telecommunications or broadband communication. Antennas, Cellular Towers, Radio Masts and Towers, Satellite Dishes, and Emergency Communications Systems are examples of Telecommunications Facilities. This includes Telecommunications Facilities for both public or private use. Bryant Woods Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Bryant Woods Park” (19.7 acres, more or less, to the North of Childs Road located at the corner of Childs Road and Canal Road at 4301 Childs Road). Canal Acres means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Canal Acres” (27.3 acres, more or less, to the South of Childs Road, to the West of Canal Road, and to the East of Sycamore Avenue, located at 19300 Canal Road). Cooks Butte Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Cooks Butte Park” (43 acres, more or less, located at 2100 Palisades Crest Drive). Cornell Natural Area means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Cornell Natural Area” (3.2 acres, more or less, to the East of Cornell Street, to the South of Larch Street, located at 16920 Cornell Street). Glennmorrie Greenway means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Glennmorrie Greenway” (1.3 acres, more or less, to the East of Paci^c Hwy, to the North of Glennmorrie Terrace, located at 16540 Paci^c Hwy). Hallinan Woods means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Hallinan Woods” (3.8 acres, more or less, located at 1103 Obrien Street). Iron Mountain Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Iron Mountain Park” (51 acres, more or less, to the North of Iron Mountain Blvd, located at 2401 Iron Mountain Blvd). Kerr Open Space means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Kerr Open Space” (10 acres, more or less, to the South of SW Stevenson Street, to East of Grouse Terrace, to the North of Walking Woods Drive, to the West of Icarus Loop) Lamont Springs Natural Area means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Lamont Springs Natural Area” (0.5 acres, more ore less, to the South of Lakeview Blvd, and to the East of Bryant Road, at the corner of Lakeview Blvd and Bryant Road, located at 4600 Lakeview Drive). River Run means the park land comprised of two parcels (River Run East and River Run West), owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “River Run” (10.8 acres, more or less, to the East of Canal Road, to the North of the Tualatin River, located at 19690 River Run Drive and 3770 Rivers Edge Drive). Southshore Natural Area means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Southshore Natural Area” (9.2 acres, more or less, located at 1201 South Shore Blvd). Springbrook Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Springbrook Park” (52 acres, more or less, to the South of Country Club Road, to the West and North of Wembley Park Road, and to the East of Boones Ferry Road). The term “Springbrook Park” does not include the City of Lake Oswego existing indoor tennis facility and adjoining parking lot. Stevens Meadows means the two park lands owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Stevens Meadows” and the “Stevens Homestead” (27.8 acres, more or less, located at 18600 Shipley Drive and 1551 Childs Road, respectively). Waluga Park – West means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Waluga Park – West” (22.8 acres, more or less, to the East of Inverurie Drive, to the North of SW Oakridge Road, to the West of Waluga Drive). Woodmont Natural Park means the park land owned by the City of Lake Oswego which is commonly referred to as “Woodmont Natural Park” (6.8 acres, more or less, at the corner of Atwater Rd and Atwater Lane, located at 13600 Atwater Lane). Nature Preserve means natural area parks or open spaces owned by the City of Lake Oswego that are managed or maintained to retain their natural condition and prevent habitat deterioration. Nature Preserves that are subject to the limitations of this Chapter, which upon rati^cation will initially include, Bryant Woods Park, Canal Acres, Cornell Natural Area, Cooks Butte Park, Glennmorrie Greenway, Hallinan Woods, Iron Mountain Park, Kerr Open Space, Lamont Springs Natural Area, River Run, Southshore Natural Area, Springbrook Park, Stevens Meadows, Waluga Park – West, and Woodmont Natural Park. −Section 43. Limitations on Development. The City of Lake Oswego shall insure that all development within a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area available for public enjoyment. To facilitate public access and use, the City of Lake Oswego may build trails for hiking, jogging, horseback and bicycle riding, may provide benches and interpretive displays, and may provide picnic and sanitary facilities within a Nature Preserve. To access and use particularly fragile habitats, boardwalks may be built; however, trails shall refrain from using hard surface materials, such as asphalt and concrete, in order to remain consistent with the natural conditions of a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall not construct or develop (or allow any person to construct or develop) any Athletic Facility, any Telecommunications Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles within a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall not cut (or allow any person to cut) any tree in a Nature Preserve for the purpose of facilitating the construction or development of any Athletic Facility, any Telecommunications Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles. The City of Lake Oswego shall not construct or develop (or allow any person to construct or develop) any facility or any structure above ground that would impair or be inconsistent with the natural conditions of a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall not cut (or allow any person to cut) any tree in a Nature Preserve for the purpose of commercial logging. The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to maintain (or allow any person to maintain) a Nature Preserve for the purposes of ecological restoration that provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates ^re hazards. The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to maintain (or allow any person to maintain) any existing facility or existing structure, or any existing parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles in a Nature Preserve constructed before (date initiative is ratiKed) that is above ground as long as that facility or structure, or parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles is not altered in any manner that would further impair or be inconsistent with the natural conditions of a Nature Preserve. The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to implement (or allow any person to implement) a park master plan for a Nature Preserve that was adopted before (date initiative is ratiKed). (Amended November 7, 1978.) −Section 44. Effective Date. This Chapter carries an effective date of (date initiative is ratiKed). −Section 45. Severability. If a court should hold invalid or unconstitutional any clause or part of this Chapter, that holding shall not affect the remaining parts of this Chapter which are not held invalid or unconstitutional. −Section 46. Application to Other Park. This Chapter shall apply to any other park (i) conveyed by property owners to the City of Lake Oswego with a “Nature Preserve” designation that shall carry with the property in perpetuity, (ii) nominated by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Board and/or the Director of Parks and Recreation designating such other park as a “Nature Preserve” and rati^ed by the City Council, (iii) rati^ed by voters speci^cally designating such other park as a “Nature Preserve”, or (iv) acquired by a bond issue after the effective date of this Chapter if (and only if) the voters speci^cally designate such other park as subject to this Chapter. If any other park is designated as subject to this Chapter, then this Chapter shall apply to that park and if its name (preceded by the word “and”) were added to the Nature Preserve de^nition of this Chapter. (Amended November 7, 1978 [Note: from November 7, 1978 until June 30, 1980, this Chapter was numbered XXV and included Sections 102 through 107]; Renumbered Chapter on July 1, 1980.) −Section 46A. Maximum Height of Structures in Residential Areas. The City of Lake Oswego shall neither construct nor allow the construction of any structure which is more than 50 feet in height within a residential zone, except for the construction of a single symbolic appurtenance of a structure to 75 foot height. The City may, however, construct or allow the construction of a lighting structure which is more than 50 feet in height in a public park or school sports ^elds located in a residential zone. For purposes of this section the height of a structure or of a part or appurtenance of a structure shall be measured from the ground or sidewalk surface within a 5-foot horizontal distance of the exterior of the structure, provided such sidewalk or ground surface is not more than 10 feet above the lowest grade as de^ned by city ordinance; or, if such sidewalk or ground surface is more than 10 feet above lowest grade, height shall be measured from a point 10 feet higher than the lowest grade, to the top of the highest element of the building or structure. (Amended May 19, 1987; March 24, 1992.) ··· Previous Page Park Protections Next Page Frequently Asked Questions CHARTER CHAPTER X REVISIONS WITH MARKUP CHARTER CHAPTER X CURRENT STAY INFORMED WITH THE FACTS SUBSCRIBE Love LO Parks is a Lake Oswego grassroots citizen-led coalition striving to protect our natural parks from future development and promoting their maintenance to preserve them as vibrant and healthy natural habitats for residents, visitors, and future generations to enjoy. Copyright 2019-21 Love LO Parks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT CAUSES NEWS POSTER SUBSCRIBE Exhibit B Measure 3-568 Artifacts Exhibit B-1 LOVELO PARKS PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS Sensible development limitations that keep our natural parks natural We're Meas4n the ba!/o ry a 3.068 t! ivirt!I,-„po YO rt n ant � • e /ns/ae• kt steps \ . 18360 Delenka Lane I Lake Oswego, OR 97034 YOU AND 4,700+ LAKE OSWEGO CITIZENS HELPED QUALIFY OUR CITIZENS' INITIATIVE STAY INFORMED SPREAD THE WORD VOTE YES • Subscribe to our Newsletter • Request a FREE Yard Sign on Citizens' Measure 3-568 to Ensure Citizen Voice Counts • Visit our Website Frequently • Talk with Friends & Neighbors • Follow Us on Social Media • Share our Social Media Posts VOTE NO on City's Competing Measure • Don't be Misled by City Council • Submit a Letter to the Editor to Avoid Business as Usual :.,., www.LoveLOParks.org o 1 HOW CAN YOU HELP? LoveLOParks.org LoveLOParks.org/Subscribe LoveLOParks.org/YardSign LoveLOParks.org/Donate tinyurl.com/LOReviewLetter •facebook.com/LoveLOParks •instagram.com/LoveLOParks •twitter.com/LoveLOParks •nextdoor.com/g/0kti6ij3f/ VISIT Our Website Frequently to Stay Current with the Facts SUBSCRIBE to our Newsletter & TALK with Friends & Neighbors REQUEST a FREE Yard Sign for Measure 3-568 ASAP DONATE Today to Help Our Grassroots Effort Succeed SUBMIT a Letter to the Editor before Oct.13 FOLLOW Us on Social Media and SHARE our Posts: STAY INFORMED & SPREAD THE WORD VOTE YES on MEASURE 3-568 LOVE LO PARKS.ORG/3-568 Dear Neighbor, This is a big moment! Thanks to you and over 4,800 Lake Oswego neighbors, our citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 has qualified for the November 2021 ballot! Vote YES on Measure 3-568! This achievement is the result of our grassroots effort; hundreds of volunteers persisted over 18-months to inform and educate our community about the necessary protections citizens seek for our natural parks. Our job is not yet complete; we have one final milestone to achieve — to earn enough votes to win this election. The City has referred a rushed and flawed competing measure that offers fewer protections. While the Mayor, City Council, and some community members have begun spreading false, misleading, and inaccurate statements, we will continue to run our campaign with integrity, facts, and honest conversations with our neighbors — our only agenda is to protect our natural parks and the abundant wildlife we all cherish. We need your help! Stay informed and spread the word with your friends and neighbors. For Measure 3-568 to win, we must vote YES on Measure 3-568 and NO on the City’s competing measure. As we learned while petitioning, grassroots campaigns like ours also require funding to reach and inform voters. Ballots arrive around October 13th, so time is very short. Our fundraising campaign is officially underway with a goal of $50,000. We have started strong with over $20,000 in donations already pledged! Be part of our success and donate today- https://LoveLOParks.org/Donate On behalf of every volunteer and petition signer, I want to express my heartfelt gratitude for your support of our grassroots effort to protect our natural parks from future development. Your humble neighbor, Questions? Email me at: Scott Handley scott@loveloparks.org Your November 2021 Voters’ Pamphlet and Ballot will have our citizen-initiated Measure 3-568 as described below. This is the same text on the petition you, along with 4,800 Lake Oswego citizens, signed that qualiﬁed citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 for the ballot. Vote YES on Measure 3-568 and NO on the City’s competing measure to protect our natural parks! MEASURE 3-568: BALLOT TITLE REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY CITIZEN INITIATIVE PETITION 2020IN-1 CAPTION: Restricts improvements on certain Lake Oswego park properties. QUESTION: Should the Lake Oswego City Charter be amended to restrict improvements on certain city park properties? SUMMARY: This Charter amendment was placed on the ballot through an initiative petition. •Applies initially to Bryant Woods Park, Canal Acres, Cooks Butte Park, Cornell Natural Area, Glenmorrie Greenway, Hallinan Woods, Iron Mountain Park, Kerr Open Space, Lamont Springs Natural Area, River Run, Southshore Natural Area, Springbrook Park, Stevens Homestead, Stevens Meadows, West Waluga Park, and Woodmont Natural Park. •Designates these properties as “Nature Preserves.” •Prohibits above-ground facilities or structures that would impair or be inconsistent with natural conditions. Also prohibits hard-surface trails, parking lots, athletic ﬁelds or facilities, roads, trails for motorized vehicles, tree-cutting for certain purposes, and telecommunications facilities. •Previously-constructed facilities or structures may be maintained if not altered in any manner that further impairs or is inconsistent with natural conditions. •Allows soft-surface trails, benches, interpretive displays, and picnic and sanitary facilities. Allows the city to implement previously-adopted park master plans. •Applies the same restrictions to any park property acquired in the future, if designated as a “Nature Preserve” by the conveying property owners, the city, or voters. Oregon statute authorizes the City Attorney to author Ballot Titles for citizen-initiated measures AND the City’s competing measure without requiring consultation from us. This is a clear conﬂict of interest. As a grassroots effort, we chose to conserve ﬁnite ﬁnancial resources and time to begin collecting petition signatures instead of challenging our measure’s assigned Ballot Title in court. The Ballot Title does not effect our measure’s precise, deliberate, and intentional legal development limitations. Key deﬁciencies by the City Attorney that show bias in our Measure 3-568’s Ballot Title: •Caption and Question: INACCURATE and MISLEADING to voters. Our measure more accurately: Limits development inconsistent with maintaining Lake Oswego natural parks and answers the question Shall the Lake Oswego City Charter be amended to limit development inconsistent with maintaining Lake Oswego natural parks? •Summary: EXCLUDES a signiﬁcant provision about natural park maintenance, accessibility, and ﬁre prevention. Our charter’s amendment speciﬁcally states: The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to maintain (or allow any person to maintain) a Nature Preserve for the purposes of ecological restoration that provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates ﬁre hazards. VOTE ‘YES’ on citizen-initiated MEASURE 3-568 identiﬁed by the above CAPTION & QUESTION VOTE ‘NO’ on the City’s competing measure under separate caption & question PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKSLOVE LO PARKS.ORG/3-568 Vote YES on Measure 3-568 by Citizens, for Citizens OUR MEASURE 3-568: •Revises & replaces the existing City Charter Chapter X that has protected Springbrook Park from development since 1978 •Protects the full acreage of Springbrook + 15 additional natural parks •Clearly defines natural park boundaries so they cannot be divided into natural & developable areas •Allows additional natural parks to be added at any time by City Council •Prohibits telecommunication facilities, parking lots, roads & trails for motorized vehicles, athletic facilities, & other facilities/structures that are inconsistent with natural conditions •Prohibits cutting of any tree for the purposes of commercial logging •Allows uses & trails compatible with accessing & enjoying natural areas •Encourages preservation to ensure safe, healthy & vibrant natural habitats •Supports park maintenance efforts that mitigate fire dangers •Allows existing City infrastructure to be maintained •Defines natural parks as “Nature Preserves” •Ensures VOTERS decide any future development otherwise prohibited & encourages the City to present a compelling case in those rare instances Vote NO on City’s competing measure! The City’s measure: •Misleads voters with nice-sounding slogans that offer no real protections •Inaccurately renames Chapter X falsely describing its intent and effect •Fails to specify natural park acreage or boundaries until a later date •Risks the potential to divide parks into natural and developable areas •Eliminates several protections sought after in citizens’ Measure 3-568 •Redefines telecommunications facility that may allow for public towers •Removes certain existing protections from Springbrook Park •Is “business as usual” w/ tedious public process that minimizes citizen voice (Keep for reference) Vote YES on Measure 3-568 Read more: LOVE LO PARKS.ORG/FACTS Myth “Springbrook Park permits vehicular access” to mitigate ﬁre hazards, such as removing dead trees and excess underbrush, and to maintain trails. These activities would not be able to continue in Springbrook and the 15 additional natural parks. Fact Measure 3-568 states that the City shall “maintain…a Nature Preserve for the purposes of ecological restoration that provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates ﬁre hazards. Furthermore, Springbrook Park’s existing charter, the baseline for Measure 3-568, states the City “…shall not construct or develop…any Athletic Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles…” If City park maintenance & ﬁre prevention efforts with vehicle access can occur in Springbrook today, then these same activities are absolutely allowed to continue for all natural parks protected by Measure 3-568. Myth Park-speciﬁc master plans wouldn’t be allowed and would lead to costly elections to get voter approval. Fact The City would be expected to develop park-speciﬁc master plans that deﬁne appropriate park uses and plan (a) trails and boardwalks (using ADA-compliant natural materials used across the nation in wilderness areas) that provide access for walking, hiking, jogging, wheelchair/ mobility devices, horseback, and bicycle riding, and (b) benches, interpretive displays, and picnic and sanitary facilities. In the rare instance the City identiﬁes a need to develop in a natural park that would otherwise be prohibited, the City would be expected to produce a compelling case for voters to decide at any May or November election. This guarantees citizens determine what is important for these natural parks. Vote NO on City’s Measure Myth The City’s measure “builds upon”, “shares same goals as”, ”doesn’t take away from”, and “clariﬁes verbiage” in the citizen-initiated measure. Fact The City’s measure uses unnecessary and nice-sounding slogans to mislead voters, but the City’s measure actually removes existing protections from Springbrook Park, eliminates several protections in Measure 3-568, and defers mapping for “natural areas” putting some parks’ acreage at risk of development. Myth Mayor Buck claims that “members of the community attempted to work with LoveLOParks on something that could be collaborative…It just fell on deaf ears.” Fact LoveLOParks met with these “members of the community” numerous times who told us to “abandon our efforts” and that their stewardship relationship with the City was adequate. We offered to incorporate their ideas with ours into a joint text, but they refused and insisted on a full rewrite offering fewer development limitations. From Sept-Nov 2019, we spoke with hundreds of citizens; In Nov 2019, we met with Director of Parks & Recreation and incorporated his feedback; In Dec 2019, we provided public comment at the City Council meeting and invited them to collaborate — only Ms. Kohlhoff made the effort and signed the petition; In the of Fall 2020, we reached out to all 8 Mayoral and Council candidates and spoke with 7. City Council has never reached out to us to discuss and collaborate. LoveLOParks- Protect Our Natural Parks- Measure 3-568 Measure 3-568 vs City's Measure Comparison Natural Parks Included Current Chapter X (by citizens in 1978) Measure 3-568 (by citizens in 2021) City's Measure (by city) • Springbrook Park (52 acres) Includes Entire park perimeter & acreage Includes Entire park perimeter & acreage Declares these parks as "Nature Preserves" Includes Acreage defined within 60- days after ratification Declares these parks, or portions of, as "Natural Areas" Risk: City can designate some park acreage for development as discussed among community members involved in writing City's referendum Missing: Stevens Homestead • Bryant Woods Park (19.7 acres) • Canal Acres (27.3 acres) • Cooks Butte Park (43 acres) • Cornell Natural Area (3.2 acres) • Glenmorrie Greenway (1.3 acres) • Hallinan Woods (3.8 acres) • Iron Mountain Park (51 acres) • Kerr Open Space (10 acres) • Lamont Springs NA (0.5 acres) • River Run (10.8 acres) • South Shore Natural Area (9.2 acres) • Stevens Homestead (5.7 acres) • Stevens Meadow (20.1 acres) • West Waluga Park (22.8 acres) • Woodmont Natural Park (6.8 acres) Not included • East Waluga • Freepons • George Rogers • Kelly Creek • Pennington Park • Sunny Slope Open Space Not included Allows Additional parks may be included any time by City per Measure 3-568's text Development Limitations Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure • All development must be consistent with the preservation of natural area parks and open spaces for public enjoyment ✔✔✔ Risk: Fails to address development inconsistent with preserving natural habitats by using nice- sounding slogans for managing ecosystems • Construction of Picnic & Sanitary Facilities Allows Allows Allows • Construction of Trails for Walking, Hiking, Jogging, Horseback, and Bicycle Riding Allows Allows Allows • Construction of Trails using natural materials & boardwalks as used in national, state & city wilderness areas meeting federal ADA-compliance Allows Allows • Construction of Benches, Interpretive Displays & Boardwalks for sensitive habitat areas Allows Allows • Construction of Athletic Facilities Prohibits Prohibits Prohibits • Construction of Parking Lots Prohibits Prohibits Allows Risk: Allows development of parking lots, paved trails & non-public roads within park boundaries which may cause destruction of natural habitat & loss of trees • Construction of Paved Trails using Asphalt and/or Concrete surfaces Prohibits • Construction of Roads or Trails for Motorized Vehicles Prohibits Prohibits • Construction of Telecommunications Facilities Prohibits Comprehensive definition for BOTH public & private telecommunications facilities Prohibits Risk: Ambiguous definition that may allow public telecommunications facilities • Construction of other new structures or facilities inconsistent with maintaining a natural park as a natural habitat Prohibits Allows Risk: Vaguely defines a tedious public process for "other uses & facilities" with decisions driven by City- "Business as Usual" LoveLOParks- Protect Our Natural Parks- Measure 3-568 Measure 3-568 vs City's Measure Comparison Maintenance & Improvements Current Chapter X (by citizens in 1978) Measure 3-568 (by citizens in 2021) City's Measure (by city) • Accessible and Safe to Public • Ecological Restoration • Healthy Habitat for Wildlife • Stewardship & Education • Eliminate Invasive Species • Restore Native Species • Selective Tree Thinning • Hazardous Tree Removal • Mitigate Fire Hazards Allows Allows • Removal of any tree FOR THE PURPOSES of Commercial Logging Prohibits Prohibits • Removal of any tree for the development of any athletic facility, telecommunications facility, parking lot, road or trail for motorized travel Prohibits Prohibits Allows • Maintain (includes maintenance, restoration, renovation & replacement) existing structures, facilities, parking lot, road, or trail provided it doesn't further impair or be inconsistent with a parks' natural conditions Allows Effective: Nov 3, 2021; Immediately upon ratification Allows Effective: Jan 1, 2022 Risk: Gives grace-period before becoming effective. Park Planning Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure • Implement existing adopted park-specific master plans that include development otherwise restricted by Chapter X; Only 2 park-specific master plans remain: Stevens Meadow Homestead Trailhead (in-progess), Canal Acres (not implemented) Allows Effective: Nov 3, 2021; Immediately upon ratification Allows Effective: Jan 1, 2022 Risk: Potential for new master plan creation before 1/1/22 that could include development which may cause destruction of natural habitat & loss of trees • New master & maintenance plans must adhere to development limitations of Chapter X Allows Allows Allows Risk: Vaguely defines a tedious public process for "other uses & facilities" with decisions driven by City- "Business as Usual" Process to Include Additional City Natural Parks Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure • Acquired by bond where voters explicitly designate a park to Chapter X Allows Allows Unspecified • Property owner may convey property to the City as a “Nature Preserve”Allows Unspecified • Parks, Rec, & Natural Resource Advisory Board nominates park as “Nature Preserve” & City Council ratifies Allows Unspecified • Parks & Rec. Director nominates park as a “Nature Preserve” & City Council ratifies Allows Unspecified • City Council may designate property by majority vote subject to Chapter X development limitations Unspecified Allows • Voters may designate additional parks as a “Nature Preserve” by ballot initiative Allows Unspecified Process to Address Future Needs Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure • City identifies a compelling need that is prohibited by Chapter X's development limitations City Council may forward a referendum at any May or November election for Voters to consider City Council may forward a referendum at any May or November election for Voters to consider Follows tedious public planning process with decisions driven by City- "Business as Usual" Voter's Pamphlet Ballot Measure Information Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure • Ballot Title- Caption, Question & Summary Written by City Attorney Dec 12, 2019 Misleading wording & omissions designed to garner a "no" vote Written by City Attorney Aug 3, 2021 Biased & favorable wording designed to garner a "yes" vote MAJOR conflict of interest with citizen-initiated measure • Explanatory Statement City Attorney consulted w/ Initiative's Chief Petitioner Aug 9, 2021 Exhibit B-2 PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS Sensible development limitations keeping our natural parks natural Join our grassroots effort!Vote YES on MEAS URE 3-568Voter d e t ails \ . 18360 Delenka Lane 1 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 4,800+ LAKE OSWEGO CITIZENS HELPED TO QUALIFY CITIZEN-INITIATED MEASURE 3-568 (keep for reference with your voters' pamphlet and ballot) STAY INFORMED SPREAD THE WORD VOTE YES • Subscribe to our Newsletter • Talk with Friends & Neighbors on Citizens' Measure 3-568 to Ensure Citizen Voice Counts * Visit our Website Frequently • Share our Social Media Posts • Follow Us on Social Media • Request a Yard Sign VOTE NO ON City Councils Measure 3-575 • Don't be Misled by City Council • Submit a Letter to the Editor to Avoid Risking our Natural Parks w ono ww.LoveLOParks.org ; HOW CAN YOU HELP? STAY INFORMED & SPREAD THE WORD LoveLOParks.org LoveLOParks.org/Subscribe LoveLOParks.org/YardSign LoveLOParks.org/Donate tinyurl.com/LOReviewLetter •facebook.com/LoveLOParks •instagram.com/LoveLOParks •twitter.com/LoveLOParks •nextdoor.com/g/0kti6ij3f/ VISIT Our Website Frequently to Stay Current with the Facts SUBSCRIBE to our Newsletter & TALK with Friends & Neighbors REQUEST a Yard Sign for Measure 3-568 DONATE to Help Our Grassroots Effort Succeed SUBMIT a Letter to the Editor FOLLOW Us on Social Media and SHARE our Posts: VOTE: YES on MEASURE 3-568 and NO on Measure 3-575 LOVE LO PARKS.ORG/3-568 Dear Neighbor, This is a big moment! Thanks to the dedication of many volunteers over the past 18 months to inform our community about the protections we seek for our natural parks, more than 4,800 Lake Oswego residents signed citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 thereby qualifying Measure 3-568 for this November’s ballot! Our grassroots effort to protect our natural parks was born 24 months ago…a result of conversations with hundreds of residents frustrated with decades of City development ambitions and a tedious “public process” that discounts citizens’ voices, especially when it comes to our cherished natural areas. We committed to finding a legal instrument to impose sensible development limitations for these fragile neighborhood natural habitats. Measure 3-568 builds upon and improves the existing City Charter protections enjoyed by Springbrook Park since 1978 for 15 additional natural parks. After Measure 3-568 qualified, City Council, with the assistance of some closely affiliated community members, referred competing Measure 3-575 to the ballot — a rushed, biased, and politically motivated measure that offers fewer legal protections under the guise of preservation. Don’t be misled by nice sounding words and political slogans that have no material impact to limit development. While the Mayor, City Council, and some community members have begun spreading false, misleading, and inaccurate statements, we have consistently run our campaign with integrity, facts, and honest conversations with our neighbors. Our only agenda is to protect our natural parks and the abundant wildlife we all cherish for the benefit of future generations. For Measure 3-568 to become law, you must vote YES on Measure 3-568 and vote NO on Measure 3-575. On behalf of every volunteer and petition signer, I want to express my heartfelt gratitude for this community’s commitment to protecting our natural parks from future development. I hope we earn your support and that you’ll join us in voting YES on Measure 3-568! Your neighbor, Questions? Email me at: Scott Handley scott@loveloparks.org Your November 2021 Voters’ Pamphlet and Ballot will have our citizen-initiated Measure 3-568 as described below. This is the same text on citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 that over 4,800 Lake Oswego citizens signed that qualiﬁed Measure 3-568 for the ballot. Vote YES on Measure 3-568 to protect our natural parks & NO on City Council’s Measure 3-575! MEASURE 3-568: BALLOT TITLE REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY CITIZEN INITIATIVE PETITION 2020IN-1 CAPTION: Restricts improvements on certain Lake Oswego park properties. QUESTION: Should the Lake Oswego City Charter be amended to restrict improvements on certain city park properties? SUMMARY: This Charter amendment was placed on the ballot through an initiative petition. •Applies initially to Bryant Woods Park, Canal Acres, Cooks Butte Park, Cornell Natural Area, Glenmorrie Greenway, Hallinan Woods, Iron Mountain Park, Kerr Open Space, Lamont Springs Natural Area, River Run, Southshore Natural Area, Springbrook Park, Stevens Homestead, Stevens Meadows, West Waluga Park, and Woodmont Natural Park. •Designates these properties as “Nature Preserves.” •Prohibits above-ground facilities or structures that would impair or be inconsistent with natural conditions. Also prohibits hard-surface trails, parking lots, athletic ﬁelds or facilities, roads, trails for motorized vehicles, tree-cutting for certain purposes, and telecommunications facilities. •Previously-constructed facilities or structures may be maintained if not altered in any manner that further impairs or is inconsistent with natural conditions. •Allows soft-surface trails, benches, interpretive displays, and picnic and sanitary facilities. Allows the city to implement previously-adopted park master plans. •Applies the same restrictions to any park property acquired in the future, if designated as a “Nature Preserve” by the conveying property owners, the city, or voters. Oregon statute authorizes the City Attorney to author Ballot Titles for citizen-initiated measures AND the City’s competing measure without requiring consultation from us. This is a clear conﬂict of interest. As a grassroots effort, we chose to conserve ﬁnite ﬁnancial resources and time to begin collecting petition signatures instead of challenging our measure’s assigned Ballot Title in court. The Ballot Title does not effect our measure’s precise, deliberate, and intentional legal development limitations. Key deﬁciencies by the City Attorney that show bias in our Measure 3-568’s Ballot Title: •Caption and Question: INACCURATE and MISLEADING to voters. Our measure more accurately: Limits development inconsistent with maintaining Lake Oswego natural parks and answers the question Shall the Lake Oswego City Charter be amended to limit development inconsistent with maintaining Lake Oswego natural parks? •Summary: EXCLUDES a signiﬁcant provision about natural park maintenance, accessibility, and ﬁre prevention. Our charter’s amendment speciﬁcally states: The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to maintain (or allow any person to maintain) a Nature Preserve for the purposes of ecological restoration that provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates ﬁre hazards. VOTE ‘YES’ on citizen-initiated MEASURE 3-568 identiﬁed by the CAPTION & QUESTION above  VOTE ‘NO’ on City Council’s competing Measure 3-575 under separate caption & question PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKSLOVE LO PARKS.ORG/3-568 Vote YES on Measure 3-568 by Citizens, for Citizens OUR MEASURE 3-568: •Revises & replaces the existing City Charter Chapter X that has protected Springbrook Park from development since 1978 •Protects the full acreage of Springbrook + 15 additional natural parks •Clearly defines natural park boundaries so they cannot be divided into natural & developable areas •Allows additional natural parks to be added at any time by City Council •Prohibits telecommunication facilities, parking lots, roads & trails for motorized vehicles, athletic facilities, & other facilities/structures that are inconsistent with natural conditions •Prohibits cutting of any tree for the purposes of commercial logging •Allows uses & trails compatible with accessing & enjoying natural areas •Encourages preservation to ensure safe, healthy & vibrant natural habitats •Supports park maintenance efforts that mitigate fire dangers •Allows existing City infrastructure to be maintained •Defines natural parks as “Nature Preserves” •Ensures VOTERS decide any future development otherwise prohibited & encourages the City to present a compelling case in those rare instances Vote NO on City Council’s competing Measure 3-575! City Council’s Measure 3-575: •Misleads voters with nice-sounding slogans that offer few real protections •Inaccurately renames Chapter X falsely describing its intent and effect •Fails to specify natural park acreage or boundaries until a later date •Risks the potential to divide parks into natural and developable areas •Eliminates several protections sought after in citizens’ Measure 3-568 •Redefines telecommunications facility that may allow for public towers •Removes certain existing protections from Springbrook Park •Is “business as usual” w/ tedious public process that minimizes citizen voice (Keep for reference) Vote NO on City Council’s Measure 3-575 YES on Measure 3-568 Read more: LOVE LO PARKS.ORG/FACTS Myth “Springbrook Park permits vehicular access” to mitigate ﬁre hazards, such as removing dead trees and excess underbrush, and to maintain trails. These activities would not be able to continue in Springbrook and the 15 additional natural parks. Fact Measure 3-568 states that the City shall “maintain…a Nature Preserve for the purposes of ecological restoration that provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates ﬁre hazards. Furthermore, Springbrook Park’s existing charter, the baseline for Measure 3-568, states the City “…shall not construct or develop…any Athletic Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles…” If City park maintenance & ﬁre prevention efforts with vehicle access can occur in Springbrook today, then these same activities are absolutely allowed to continue for all natural parks protected by Measure 3-568. Myth Park-speciﬁc master plans wouldn’t be allowed and would lead to costly elections to get voter approval. Fact The City would be expected to develop park-speciﬁc master plans that deﬁne appropriate park uses and plan (a) trails and boardwalks (using ADA-compliant natural materials used across the nation in wilderness areas) that provide access for walking, hiking, jogging, wheelchair/ mobility devices, horseback, and bicycle riding, and (b) benches, interpretive displays, and picnic and sanitary facilities. In the rare instance the City identiﬁes a need to develop in a natural park that would otherwise be prohibited, the City would be expected to produce a compelling case for voters to decide at any May or November election. This guarantees citizens determine what is important for these natural parks. Myth The City’s measure “builds upon”, “shares same goals as”, ”doesn’t take away from”, and “clariﬁes verbiage” in the citizen-initiated measure. Fact The City’s measure uses unnecessary and nice-sounding slogans to mislead voters, but the City’s measure actually removes existing protections from Springbrook Park, eliminates several protections in Measure 3-568, and defers mapping for “natural areas” putting some parks’ acreage at risk of development. Myth Mayor Buck claims that “members of the community attempted to work with LoveLOParks on something that could be collaborative…It just fell on deaf ears.” Fact LoveLOParks met with these “members of the community” numerous times who told us to “abandon our efforts” and that their stewardship relationship with the City was adequate. We offered to incorporate their ideas with ours into a joint text, but they refused and insisted on a full rewrite offering fewer development limitations. From Sept-Nov 2019, we spoke with hundreds of citizens; In Nov 2019, we met with Director of Parks & Recreation and incorporated his feedback; In Dec 2019, we provided public comment at the City Council meeting and invited them to collaborate — only Ms. Kohlhoff made the effort and signed the petition; In the of Fall 2020, we reached out to all 8 Mayoral and Council candidates and spoke with 7. City Council has never reached out to us to discuss and collaborate. LoveLOParks- Protect Our Natural Parks- YES on Measure 3-568 Citizens' Measure 3-568 vs City's Measure 3-575 Natural Parks Included Current Chapter X (by citizens in 1978) Measure 3-568 (by citizens in 2021) City's Measure 3-575 (by city council) • Springbrook Park (52 acres) Includes Entire park perimeter & acreage Includes Protects entire park perimeter & acreage Declares these parks as "Nature Preserves" Includes Acreage defined within 60- days after ratification Declares these parks, or portions of, as "Natural Areas" Risk: City may designate some park acreage for development (discussed among community members involved in writing City's measure) Missing: Stevens Homestead • Bryant Woods Park (19.7 acres) • Canal Acres (27.3 acres) • Cooks Butte Park (43 acres) • Cornell Natural Area (3.2 acres) • Glenmorrie Greenway (1.3 acres) • Hallinan Woods (3.8 acres) • Iron Mountain Park (51 acres) • Kerr Open Space (10 acres) • Lamont Springs NA (0.5 acres) • River Run (10.8 acres) • South Shore Natural Area (9.2 acres) • Stevens Homestead (5.7 acres) • Stevens Meadow (20.1 acres) • West Waluga Park (22.8 acres) • Woodmont Natural Park (6.8 acres) Not Included • East Waluga • Freepons • George Rogers • Kelly Creek • Pennington Park • Sunny Slope Open Space Not Included Allows Additional parks may be included at any time by City per Measure 3-568's text Development Limitations Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure 3-575 • All development must be consistent with the preservation of natural area parks and open spaces for public enjoyment ✔✔✔ Risk: Fails to address development inconsistent with preserving natural habitats by using nice- sounding slogans for managing ecosystems • Construction of Picnic & Sanitary Facilities Allows Allows Allows • Construction of Trails for Walking, Hiking, Jogging, Horseback, and Bicycle Riding Allows Allows Allows • Construction of Trails using natural materials & boardwalks as used in national, state & city wilderness areas meeting federal ADA-compliance Allows Allows • Construction of Benches, Interpretive Displays & Boardwalks for sensitive habitat areas Allows Allows • Construction of Athletic Facilities Prohibits Prohibits Prohibits • Construction of Parking Lots Prohibits Prohibits Allows Risk: Allows development of parking lots, paved trails & non-public roads within park boundaries which may cause destruction of natural habitat & loss of trees • Construction of Paved Trails using Asphalt and/or Concrete surfaces Prohibits • Construction of Roads or Trails for Motorized Vehicles Prohibits Prohibits • Construction of Telecommunications Facilities Prohibits Comprehensive definition for BOTH public & private telecommunications facilities Prohibits Risk: Ambiguous definition that may allow public telecommunications facilities • Construction of other new structures or facilities inconsistent with maintaining a natural park as a natural habitat Prohibits Allows Risk: Vaguely defines a tedious public process for "other uses & facilities" with decisions driven by City- "Business as Usual" LoveLOParks- Protect Our Natural Parks- YES on Measure 3-568 Citizens' Measure 3-568 vs City's Measure 3-575 Maintenance & Improvements Current Chapter X (by citizens in 1978) Measure 3-568 (by citizens in 2021) City's Measure 3-575 (by city council) • Accessible and Safe to Public • Ecological Restoration • Healthy Habitat for Wildlife • Stewardship & Education • Eliminate Invasive Species • Restore Native Species • Selective Tree Thinning • Hazardous Tree Removal • Mitigate Fire Hazards Allows Allows • Removal of any tree FOR THE PURPOSES of Commercial Logging Prohibits Prohibits • Removal of any tree for the development of any athletic facility, telecommunications facility, parking lot, road or trail for motorized travel Prohibits Prohibits Allows • Maintain (includes maintenance, restoration, renovation & replacement) existing structures, facilities, parking lot, road, or trail provided it doesn't further impair or be inconsistent with a parks' natural conditions Allows Effective: Nov 3, 2021; Immediately upon ratification Allows Effective: Jan 1, 2022 Risk: Gives grace-period before becoming effective. Park Planning Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure 3-575 • Implement existing adopted park-specific master plans that include development otherwise restricted by Chapter X; Only 2 park-specific master plans remain: Stevens Meadow Homestead Trailhead (in-progess), Canal Acres (not implemented) Allows Effective: Nov 3, 2021; Immediately upon ratification Allows Effective: Jan 1, 2022 Risk: Potential for new master plan creation before 1/1/22 that could include development which may cause destruction of natural habitat & loss of trees • New master & maintenance plans must adhere to development limitations of Chapter X Allows Allows Allows Risk: Vaguely defines a tedious public process for "other uses & facilities" with decisions driven by City- "Business as Usual" Process to Include Additional City Natural Parks Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure 3-575 • Acquired by bond where voters explicitly designate a park to Chapter X Allows Allows Unspecified • Property owner may convey property to the City as a “Nature Preserve”Allows Unspecified • Parks, Rec, & Natural Resource Advisory Board nominates park as “Nature Preserve” & City Council ratifies Allows Unspecified • Parks & Rec. Director nominates park as a “Nature Preserve” & City Council ratifies Allows Unspecified • City Council may designate property by majority vote subject to Chapter X development limitations Unspecified Allows • Voters may designate additional parks as a “Nature Preserve” by ballot initiative Allows Unspecified Process to Address Future Needs Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure 3-575 • City identifies a future compelling need that is prohibited by Chapter X's development limitations City Council may forward a measure to any May or November election for Voters to consider City Council may forward a measure to any May or November election for Voters to consider Follows tedious public planning process with decisions driven by City- "Business as Usual" Voter's Pamphlet Ballot Measure Information Current Chapter X Measure 3-568 City's Measure 3-575 • Ballot Title- Caption, Question & Summary Written by City Attorney Dec 12, 2019 Misleading wording & omissions designed to garner a "no" vote Written by City Attorney Aug 3, 2021 Biased & favorable wording designed to garner a "yes" vote MAJOR conflict of interest with citizen-initiated measure • Explanatory Statement City Attorney consulted w/ Initiative's Chief Petitioner Aug 9, 2021 PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS - YES ON MEASURE 3-568 ENDORSEMENT DON’T RISK OUR NATURAL PARKS - NO on City Council’s Measure 3-575 “Since 1974, Oregon Wild has worked to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations. We support Lake Oswego Measure 3-568 as a citizen-led, grassroots effort to protect and preserve the ecological values, public access, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities provided by Lake Oswego's parks.” — Jonathan Jelen, Oregon Wild PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS - YES ON MEASURE 3-568 ENDORSEMENT DON’T RISK OUR NATURAL PARKS - NO on City Council’s Measure 3-575 “Since 1974, Oregon Wild has worked to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations. We support Lake Oswego Measure 3-568 as a citizen-led, grassroots effort to protect and preserve the ecological values, public access, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities provided by Lake Oswego's parks.” — Jonathan Jelen, Oregon Wild PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS - YES ON MEASURE 3-568 ENDORSEMENT DON’T RISK OUR NATURAL PARKS - NO on City Council’s Measure 3-575 “Since 1974, Oregon Wild has worked to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations. We support Lake Oswego Measure 3-568 as a citizen-led, grassroots effort to protect and preserve the ecological values, public access, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities provided by Lake Oswego's parks.” — Jonathan Jelen, Oregon Wild PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS - YES ON MEASURE 3-568 ENDORSEMENT DON’T RISK OUR NATURAL PARKS - NO on City Council’s Measure 3-575 “Since 1974, Oregon Wild has worked to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations. We support Lake Oswego Measure 3-568 as a citizen-led, grassroots effort to protect and preserve the ecological values, public access, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities provided by Lake Oswego's parks.” — Jonathan Jelen, Oregon Wild PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS - YES ON MEASURE 3-568 ENDORSEMENT “Sierra Club proudly endorses Measure 3-568. The measure, if passed, will define natural park boundaries enabling the protection of natural habitats, while supporting accessibility of these areas for public enjoyment. The measure also creates mechanisms to better enable citizens to take part in critical decisions related to 15 natural parks. One of Sierra Club's missions is "to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment", and we wholeheartedly support this grassroots citizen-initiated measure that seeks to do just that.” — Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS - YES ON MEASURE 3-568 ENDORSEMENT “Sierra Club proudly endorses Measure 3-568. The measure, if passed, will define natural park boundaries enabling the protection of natural habitats, while supporting accessibility of these areas for public enjoyment. The measure also creates mechanisms to better enable citizens to take part in critical decisions related to 15 natural parks. One of Sierra Club's missions is "to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment", and we wholeheartedly support this grassroots citizen-initiated measure that seeks to do just that.” — Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS - YES ON MEASURE 3-568 ENDORSEMENT “Sierra Club proudly endorses Measure 3-568. The measure, if passed, will define natural park boundaries enabling the protection of natural habitats, while supporting accessibility of these areas for public enjoyment. The measure also creates mechanisms to better enable citizens to take part in critical decisions related to 15 natural parks. One of Sierra Club's missions is "to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment", and we wholeheartedly support this grassroots citizen-initiated measure that seeks to do just that.” — Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS - YES ON MEASURE 3-568 ENDORSEMENT “Sierra Club proudly endorses Measure 3-568. The measure, if passed, will define natural park boundaries enabling the protection of natural habitats, while supporting accessibility of these areas for public enjoyment. The measure also creates mechanisms to better enable citizens to take part in critical decisions related to 15 natural parks. One of Sierra Club's missions is "to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment", and we wholeheartedly support this grassroots citizen-initiated measure that seeks to do just that.” — Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club Exhibit B-3 PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS Sensible development limitations keeping our natural parks natural Join our grassroots effort! Vote YES on MEAS URE 3-568 Voter d e t ails Read endorsements inside 18360 Delenka Lane | Lake Oswego, OR 97034 4,800+ LAKE OSWEGO CITIZENS HELPED TO QUALIFY CITIZEN-INITIATED MEASURE 3-568 STAY INFORMED SPREAD THE WORD Sub scrib e to o ur Newslet ter Visi t o ur We b s i te Fr e q uently Fo l l ow U s on S ocial M e dia www.LoveLOParks.org/compare Ta l k wi t h Friends & Neighbor s Sha r e o ur S o cia l Med i a Po sts R e quest a Ya r d Sign Submi t a Let ter to the Edi t o r Measure 3-568 t o Ens u r e C i t i z e n Voice Count s VOT E N O O N t o A v oid Ris king our Natura l Pa rks VOTE YES Endorsements insidewww.LoveLOParks.org Dear Neighbor, This is a big moment! Thanks to the dedication of many volunteers over the past 18 months to inform our community about the protections we seek for our natural parks, more than 4,800 Lake Oswego residents signed citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 thereby qualifying Measure 3-568 for this November’s ballot! Our grassroots effort to protect our natural parks was born 24 months ago…a result of conversations with hundreds of residents frustrated with decades of City development ambitions and a tedious “public process” that discounts citizens’ voices, especially when it comes to our cherished natural areas. We committed to finding a legal instrument to impose sensible development limitations for these fragile neighborhood natural habitats. Measure 3-568 builds upon and improves the existing City Charter protections enjoyed by Springbrook Park since 1978 for 15 additional natural parks. After Measure 3-568 qualified, City Council, with the assistance of some closely affiliated community members, referred competing Measure 3-575 to the ballot — a rushed, biased, and politically motivated measure that offers fewer legal Charter protections under the guise of preservation. In fact, protections are transferred from the Charter to ordinances that City Council can change anytime with a 4:3 vote. This deception is disingenuous to our community and all who’ve fought to protect our natural parks from development. And, it strips 40 years of protections from Springbrook Park — putting it at grave risk. While the Mayor, City Council, and some community members have begun spreading false, misleading, and inaccurate statements, we have consistently run our campaign with integrity, facts, and honest conversations with our neighbors. Unlike the special interests and developers funding and endorsing the City’s campaign, our campaign is funded by our friends and neighbors and endorsed by TWO prominent state environment and conservation organizations. Our only agenda is to protect our natural parks and the abundant wildlife we all cherish for the benefit of our community and future generations. For Measure 3-568 to become law, you must vote YES on Measure 3-568 and vote NO on Measure 3-575. On behalf of every volunteer, donor, and petition signer, I want to express my heartfelt gratitude for this community’s commitment to protecting our natural parks from future development. I hope we earn your support and that you’ll join us in voting YES on Measure 3-568! Your neighbor, Questions? Email me at: Scott Handley scott@loveloparks.org LOVE LO PARKS.ORG/3-568 “Sierra Club proudly endorses Measure 3-568. The measure, if passed, will define natural park boundaries enabling the protection of natural habitats, while supporting accessibility of these areas for public enjoyment. The measure also creates mechanisms to better enable citizens to take part in critical decisions related to 15 natural parks. One of Sierra Club's missions is "to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment", and we wholeheartedly support this grassroots citizen-initiated measure that seeks to do just that.” — Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club “Since 1974, Oregon Wild has worked to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations. We support Lake Oswego Measure 3-568 as a citizen-led, grassroots effort to protect and preserve the ecological values, public access, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities provided by Lake Oswego's parks.” — Oregon Wild VOTE: YES on MEASURE 3-568 and NO on Measure 3-575 ENDORSEMENTS Your November 2021 Voters’ Pamphlet and Ballot will have our citizen-initiated Measure 3-568 as described below. This is the same text on citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 that over 4,800 Lake Oswego citizens signed that qualiﬁed Measure 3-568 for the ballot. Vote YES on Measure 3-568 to protect our natural parks & NO on City Council’s Measure 3-575! MEASURE 3-568: BALLOT TITLE REFERRED TO THE PEOPLE BY CITIZEN INITIATIVE PETITION 2020IN-1 CAPTION: Restricts improvements on certain Lake Oswego park properties. QUESTION: Should the Lake Oswego City Charter be amended to restrict improvements on certain city park properties? SUMMARY: This Charter amendment was placed on the ballot through an initiative petition. •Applies initially to Bryant Woods Park, Canal Acres, Cooks Butte Park, Cornell Natural Area, Glenmorrie Greenway, Hallinan Woods, Iron Mountain Park, Kerr Open Space, Lamont Springs Natural Area, River Run, Southshore Natural Area, Springbrook Park, Stevens Homestead, Stevens Meadows, West Waluga Park, and Woodmont Natural Park. •Designates these properties as “Nature Preserves.” •Prohibits above-ground facilities or structures that would impair or be inconsistent with natural conditions. Also prohibits hard-surface trails, parking lots, athletic ﬁelds or facilities, roads, trails for motorized vehicles, tree-cutting for certain purposes, and telecommunications facilities. •Previously-constructed facilities or structures may be maintained if not altered in any manner that further impairs or is inconsistent with natural conditions. •Allows soft-surface trails, benches, interpretive displays, and picnic and sanitary facilities. Allows the city to implement previously-adopted park master plans. •Applies the same restrictions to any park property acquired in the future, if designated as a “Nature Preserve” by the conveying property owners, the city, or voters. Oregon statute authorizes the City Attorney to author Ballot Titles for citizen-initiated measures AND the City’s competing measure without requiring consultation from us. This is a clear conﬂict of interest. As a grassroots effort, we chose to conserve ﬁnite ﬁnancial resources and time to begin collecting petition signatures instead of challenging our measure’s assigned Ballot Title in court. The Ballot Title does not effect our measure’s precise, deliberate, and intentional legal development limitations. Key deﬁciencies by the City Attorney that show bias in our Measure 3-568’s Ballot Title: •Caption and Question: INACCURATE and MISLEADING to voters. Our measure more accurately: Limits development inconsistent with maintaining Lake Oswego natural parks and answers the question Shall the Lake Oswego City Charter be amended to limit development inconsistent with maintaining Lake Oswego natural parks? •Summary: EXCLUDES a signiﬁcant provision about natural park maintenance, accessibility, and ﬁre prevention. Our charter’s amendment speciﬁcally states: The City of Lake Oswego shall be allowed to maintain (or allow any person to maintain) a Nature Preserve for the purposes of ecological restoration that provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates ﬁre hazards. VOTE ‘YES’ on citizen-initiated MEASURE 3-568 identiﬁed by the CAPTION & QUESTION above  VOTE ‘NO’ on City Council’s competing Measure 3-575 under separate caption & question Vote YES on Measure 3-568 by Citizens, for Citizens PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKSLOVE LO PARKS.ORG/COMPARE OUR MEASURE 3-568: •Endorsed by TWO prominent environment and conservation organizations •Enhances & strengthens the existing City Charter Chapter X that has protected Springbrook Park from development since 1978 •Protects the full acreage of Springbrook + 15 additional natural parks •Explicitly defines natural park boundaries so they cannot be divided into natural & developable areas nor altered without voter approval •Allows additional natural parks to be added at any time by City Council •Prohibits telecommunication facilities, parking lots, roads & trails for motorized vehicles, athletic facilities, other facilities/structures, & commercial logging that are incompatible with natural habitats •Allows uses & trails compatible with accessing & enjoying natural areas •Encourages preservation to ensure safe, healthy & vibrant natural habitats •Supports park maintenance efforts that mitigate fire dangers •Allows maintenance of existing City infrastructure •Defines natural parks as “Nature Preserves” •Ensures VOTERS decide any future development otherwise prohibited & encourages the City to present a compelling case in those rare instances Vote NO on City Council’s competing Measure 3-575! City Council’s Measure 3-575: •Voters’ Pamphlet does not accurately explain intent, changes or its effect •Provides weak City ordinance protections subject to change at any time •Delays defining natural park acreage and boundaries until AFTER we vote •Risks dividing natural parks into natural and developable areas •Offers no substantial development limitations only colorful words •Eliminates most protections sought after by citizens in Measure 3-568 •Redefines telecommunications facility that may allow for public towers •Removes existing protections from Springbrook Park, putting it at risk •Allows “other uses & facilities” incompatible with protecting natural habitat •Is “business as usual” w/ tedious public process that minimizes citizen voice (Keep for Reference) Vote NO on City Council’s Measure 3-575 YES on Measure 3-568 Read more: LOVE LO PARKS.ORG/FACTS Myth “Springbrook Park permits vehicular access” to mitigate ﬁre hazards, such as removing dead trees and excess underbrush, and to maintain trails. These activities would not be able to continue in Springbrook and the 15 additional natural parks. Fact Measure 3-568 states that the City shall “maintain…a Nature Preserve for the purposes of ecological restoration that provides a safe and healthy natural area that is accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates ﬁre hazards. Furthermore, Springbrook Park’s existing charter, the baseline for Measure 3-568, states the City “…shall not construct or develop…any Athletic Facility, or any parking lot, road, or trail for motorized vehicles…” If City park maintenance & ﬁre prevention efforts with vehicle access can occur in Springbrook today, then these same activities are absolutely allowed to continue for all natural parks protected by Measure 3-568. Myth Park-speciﬁc master plans wouldn’t be allowed and would lead to costly elections to get voter approval. Fact The City would be expected to develop park-speciﬁc master plans that deﬁne appropriate park uses and plan (a) trails and boardwalks (using ADA-compliant natural materials used in wilderness areas across the nation) that provide access for walking, hiking, jogging, wheelchair/ mobility devices, horseback, and bicycle riding, and (b) benches, interpretive displays, and picnic and sanitary facilities. In the rare instance the City identiﬁes a need to develop in a natural park that would otherwise be prohibited, the City would be expected to produce a compelling case for voters to decide at any May or November election. This guarantees citizens, not a few individuals, determine what is important for these natural parks. Myth The City’s measure “builds upon”, “shares same goals as”, ”doesn’t take away from”, and “clariﬁes verbiage” in the citizen-initiated measure. Fact The City’s Measure 3-575 rewrites Chapter X using unnecessary and nice- sounding slogans to mislead voters, while actually removes existing protections from Springbrook Park, eliminating most protections in Measure 3-568, and deferring mapping of “natural areas” until AFTER we vote putting some natural parks’ acreage at risk of development. Myth Mayor Buck claims that “members of the community attempted to work with LoveLOParks on something that could be collaborative…It just fell on deaf ears.” Fact LoveLOParks met with these “members of the community” numerous times who told us to “abandon our efforts” and that their stewardship relationship with the City was adequate. We offered to incorporate their ideas with ours into a joint text, but they refused and insisted on a full rewrite offering fewer development limitations. From Sept-Nov 2019, we spoke with hundreds of citizens; In Nov 2019, we met with Director of Parks & Recreation and incorporated his feedback; In Dec 2019, we provided public comment at the City Council meeting and invited them to collaborate — only Ms. Kohlhoff made the effort and signed the petition; In the of Fall 2020, we reached out to all 8 Mayoral and Council candidates and spoke with 7. City Council has never reached out to us to discuss and collaborate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䘠䘠䘠 5LVN)DLOVWRDGGUHVV GHYHORSPHQWLQFRQVLVWHQW ZLWKSUHVHUYLQJQDWXUDO KDELWDWVE\XVLQJQLFH VRXQGLQJVORJDQVIRU PDQDJLQJHFRV\VWHPV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI3LFQLF 6DQLWDU\)DFLOLWLHV$OORZV $OORZV $OORZV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI7UDLOVIRU:DONLQJ+LNLQJ-RJJLQJ+RUVHEDFNDQG%LF\FOH5LGLQJ$OORZV $OORZV $OORZV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI7UDLOVXVLQJQDWXUDOPDWHULDOV ERDUGZDONVDVXVHGLQQDWLRQDOVWDWH FLW\ZLOGHUQHVVDUHDV PHHWLQJIHGHUDO$'$FRPSOLDQFH $OORZV $OORZV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI%HQFKHV,QWHUSUHWLYH'LVSOD\V %RDUGZDONVIRUVHQVLWLYHKDELWDWDUHDV $OORZV $OORZV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI$WKOHWLF)DFLOLWLHV 3URKLELWV 3URKLELWV 3URKLELWV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI3DUNLQJ/RWV 3URKLELWV 3URKLELWV $OORZV 5LVN$OORZVGHYHORSPHQW RISDUNLQJORWVSDYHGWUDLOV QRQSXEOLFURDGVZLWKLQ SDUNERXQGDULHVZKLFKPD\ FDXVHGHVWUXFWLRQRIQDWXUDO KDELWDW ORVVRIWUHHV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI3DYHG7UDLOVXVLQJ$VSKDOWDQGRU&RQFUHWHVXUIDFHV 3URKLELWV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI5RDGVRU7UDLOVIRU0RWRUL]HG9HKLFOHV 3URKLELWV 3URKLELWV &RQVWUXFWLRQRI7HOHFRPPXQLFDWLRQV)DFLOLWLHV 3URKLELWV &RPSUHKHQVLYHGHILQLWLRQ IRU%27+SXEOLF SULYDWH WHOHFRPPXQLFDWLRQVIDFLOLWLHV 3URKLELWV 5LVN$PELJXRXVGHILQLWLRQ WKDWPD\DOORZSXEOLF WHOHFRPPXQLFDWLRQVIDFLOLWLHV &RQVWUXFWLRQRIRWKHUQHZVWUXFWXUHVRUIDFLOLWLHVLQFRQVLVWHQWZLWKPDLQWDLQLQJDQDWXUDOSDUNDVDQDWXUDOKDELWDW 3URKLELWV $OORZV 5LVN9DJXHO\GHILQHVD WHGLRXVSXEOLFSURFHVVIRU RWKHUXVHV IDFLOLWLHVZLWK GHFLVLRQVGULYHQE\&LW\ %XVLQHVVDV8VXDO /RYH/23DUNV3URWHFW2XU1DWXUDO3DUNV<(6RQ0HDVXUH%:&LWL]HQV 0HDVXUHYV&LW\ V0HDVXUH 0DLQWHQDQFH ,PSURYHPHQWV &XUUHQW&KDSWHU; E\FLWL]HQVLQ 0HDVXUH E\FLWL]HQVLQ &LW\ V0HDVXUH E\FLW\FRXQFLO $FFHVVLEOHDQG6DIHWR3XEOLF (FRORJLFDO5HVWRUDWLRQ +HDOWK\+DELWDWIRU:LOGOLIH 6WHZDUGVKLS (GXFDWLRQ (OLPLQDWH,QYDVLYH6SHFLHV 5HVWRUH1DWLYH6SHFLHV 6HOHFWLYH7UHH7KLQQLQJ +D]DUGRXV7UHH5HPRYDO 0LWLJDWH)LUH+D]DUGV $OORZV $OORZV 5HPRYDORIDQ\WUHH)257+(385326(6RI&RPPHUFLDO/RJJLQJ 3URKLELWV 3URKLELWV 5HPRYDORIDQ\WUHHIRUWKHGHYHORSPHQWRIDQ\DWKOHWLFIDFLOLW\WHOHFRPPXQLFDWLRQVIDFLOLW\SDUNLQJORW URDGRUWUDLOIRUPRWRUL]HGWUDYHO 3URKLELWV 3URKLELWV $OORZV 0DLQWDLQLQFOXGHVPDLQWHQDQFHUHVWRUDWLRQUHQRYDWLRQ UHSODFHPHQWH[LVWLQJVWUXFWXUHVIDFLOLWLHV SDUNLQJORWURDGRUWUDLOSURYLGHGLWGRHVQ WIXUWKHULPSDLURUEHLQFRQVLVWHQWZLWKDSDUNV QDWXUDOFRQGLWLRQV $OORZV (IIHFWLYH1RY ,PPHGLDWHO\XSRQ UDWLILFDWLRQ $OORZV (IIHFWLYH-DQ 5LVN*LYHVJUDFHSHULRG EHIRUHEHFRPLQJHIIHFWLYH 3DUN3ODQQLQJ &XUUHQW&KDSWHU;0HDVXUH&LW\ V0HDVXUH ,PSOHPHQWH[LVWLQJDGRSWHGSDUNVSHFLILFPDVWHUSODQVWKDWLQFOXGHGHYHORSPHQWRWKHUZLVHUHVWULFWHGE\ &KDSWHU;2QO\SDUNVSHFLILFPDVWHUSODQVUHPDLQ6WHYHQV0HDGRZ+RPHVWHDG7UDLOKHDGLQSURJHVV &DQDO$FUHVQRWLPSOHPHQWHG $OORZV (IIHFWLYH1RY ,PPHGLDWHO\XSRQ UDWLILFDWLRQ $OORZV (IIHFWLYH-DQ 5LVN3RWHQWLDOIRUQHZ PDVWHUSODQFUHDWLRQEHIRUH WKDWFRXOGLQFOXGH GHYHORSPHQWZKLFKPD\ FDXVHGHVWUXFWLRQRIQDWXUDO KDELWDW ORVVRIWUHHV 1HZPDVWHU PDLQWHQDQFHSODQVPXVWDGKHUHWRGHYHORSPHQWOLPLWDWLRQVRI&KDSWHU; $OORZV $OORZV $OORZV 5LVN9DJXHO\GHILQHVD WHGLRXVSXEOLFSURFHVVIRU RWKHUXVHV IDFLOLWLHVZLWK GHFLVLRQVGULYHQE\&LW\ %XVLQHVVDV8VXDO 3URFHVVWR,QFOXGH$GGLWLRQDO&LW\1DWXUDO3DUNV &XUUHQW&KDSWHU;0HDVXUH&LW\ V0HDVXUH $FTXLUHGE\ERQGZKHUHYRWHUVH[SOLFLWO\GHVLJQDWHDSDUNWR&KDSWHU;$OORZV $OORZV 8QVSHFLILHG 3URSHUW\RZQHUPD\FRQYH\SURSHUW\WRWKH&LW\DVD³1DWXUH3UHVHUYH´$OORZV 8QVSHFLILHG 3DUNV5HF 1DWXUDO5HVRXUFH$GYLVRU\%RDUGQRPLQDWHVSDUNDV³1DWXUH3UHVHUYH´ &LW\&RXQFLOUDWLILHV $OORZV 8QVSHFLILHG 3DUNV 5HF'LUHFWRUQRPLQDWHVSDUNDVD³1DWXUH3UHVHUYH´ &LW\&RXQFLOUDWLILHV $OORZV 8QVSHFLILHG &LW\&RXQFLOPD\GHVLJQDWHSURSHUW\E\PDMRULW\YRWHVXEMHFWWR&KDSWHU;GHYHORSPHQWOLPLWDWLRQV 8QVSHFLILHG $OORZV 9RWHUVPD\GHVLJQDWHDGGLWLRQDOSDUNVDVD³1DWXUH3UHVHUYH´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xhibit B-4   Yes! On Citizen-initiated Measure 3-568 PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKSLOVELO PARKS.ORG A YES Vote: •Protects 16 natural parks - strong Charter protections - full acreage & boundaries - deﬁned “Nature Preserves” •Allows City Council to add more parks at any time •Prohibits new facilities & structures incompatible w/ natural habitats •Prohibits parking lots, road & trails for motorized vehicles and commercial logging •Allows compatible uses/trails •Encourages preservation for safe & healthy habitats •Supports maintenance that mitigates ﬁre dangers •Allows maintenance of existing City infrastructure •Ensures VOTERS decide any future development otherwise prohibited •Encourages City to present compelling case for any development to voters By Citizens, For Citizens Stay Informed: City Council’s measure: •Full text not distributed to voters for review - Voters’ Pamphlet does not accurately explain intent or its effect, misleading voters •Provides weak City Ordinance protections subject to change any time •Delays deﬁning park acreage & boundaries to AFTER vote - risks dividing parks into “natural” & developable •Offers no substantial development limitations •Eliminates most protections in Citizens’ Measure 3-568 •Does not prohibit certain telecommunications towers •Removes Springbrook Park protections, putting it at risk •Allows “other uses & facilities” incompatible w/ protecting natural habitat •“Business as usual” w/ tedious public process that minimizes citizen voiceDON’T RISK OUR NATURAL PARKSLOVE LOPARKS.ORG Dispel Myths, Get Facts: NO! On City Council’s Measure 3-575 Read 3-575’s Full Legal Text: https://tinyurl.com/LO-Chapter-X Exhibit B-5 ITI EWRil11C A.rAU1173E TI=TM 1,,ip . , ,., E-_= , ,..-',.,i4., , Ai- . ci_ „,„ •s.i. •-„, _. , . "er ENDORSED! limpp CC s� a 5 r�}Yr p'� ��l. S C �' .'R�+ 'Y1 1 OREGON WILD N O gill CF DpRS . ~ Prominent environment and } '•" ttr conservation organizations choose 7:-� --�r Citizens' Measure 3-568± `, = t �, ,v $ k, 4 LED & FUNDED F-"A , Y CITIZENS, FOR CITIZENS .r T VELOTL-IilV7W�oCW1 NOT DEVELOPERS a V N. cli N O 0 ix > C Y LP "p °'� a' G] CDCD ~ a� a °' mow d Za a) C ,. o - om E > to c CO a a) 5 2 � a c'• Caw 0 � 112 2od o- a' ° 07 o a� E i ca v one c ' au- = c ca - cacaz 5 Ed m > >, a•= J CD � N vi = Q N � � .5 -cQ ma 0 ° O Cl) - -0o � � i- E - o � asca c JC7aj .c c� pa � 0 0a > ro � � +? a, � Ua� o o- g Qc ED �Q Z wxs Zoo N aed o > 2 > o z c > coo ❑ a' 4� Li Ocn - 0 V) > qj W ,2Wc 2a5U Octico (I) Le Qc 0 0 z U In CD 0 ° w w = 0) 2 a� p 0 .c4 w � as re 0 0 � m 0ljm W � qi •— cna) EU 0 -° a) Jo HE i w cc 0 2 0c ,_ -2 a) } � s_ oa I— � O O y °d WD cn � , c - E Qa 00 0 O DC w 3 o U c aro UU y -t a U a H co a R1 CO .� rn `n 2 .c co � r `� 0 L 111) AG N — c -° r CD al aj 1 acj 0 p, m C w N 0 Y C - CO a . � � oa, a� r�R o �v a� ocn .coa� o L V 2 0 L .- >- � ° cn p +- aj -0 aj Z cr °'s c11 N Ia c 0' aj Cl) M m -aO a co .E -t -ol c -t 0 0 � - 0 a) ( ojo o co Z w 's -C a V) }' U J an cn cy = 7 a c co 0 W 15 0O 2N DN a) H � -6a) O .> O g0—j0E � O 0 _c U O M UaDOa = 2mE Nrom 0c Na c c Z c w , a c 2 a c - U CC _c � a > 1- O E a) • C� °d Z X cD U L O w 0 0 2 CC c 2 Q7 0 LI Ili ro 0 H cn a 0 o a) Cl) Cl- o N 7) 0 aCd > a - a cr co mr U) a�>i ci 0 a Exhibit B-6 ".��(:crH � � ON D1EALEK y _. VOTE a]J ON u T-EM ENDORSED! Prominent environment and conservation organizations choose Citizens'Measure 3-568! map "Oregon Wild supports Measure 3-568 to protect and preserve the ecological values, public access,wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities provided .« ..n by Lake Oswego's parks." "Sierra Club proudly endorses Measure 3-568. The measure defines natural park boundaries enabling the protection of natural habitats,while supporting r accessibility of these areas for public enjoyment.° OC • .- _ -,, ?� �=. .�:-• fY. yam. la la Sensible development limitations to keep our natural parks • safe, accessible, healthy, and vibrant natural habitats YES on Measure 3-568 NO on Measure 3-575 Protects Our Natural Parks Risks Our Natural Parks LED&FUNDED by citizens LED&FUNDED by developers, for citizens&preserving our LO way of life city interests&political affiliates STRONG Charter protections WEAK Charter protections using legally explicit safeguards using City ordinances FOCUSES on development limitations DOES NOT LIMIT development; in the Charter allows tree removal&parking lots W EXPLICITLY defines 16 natural parks, DEFERS defining natural parks, their acreage&boundaries their acreage&boundaries in the Chatter by City ordinance&AFTER we vote Charter provides LONG-TERM Ordinances provide SHORT-TERM strong protection from political motives& limited protection from political motives& changes in Mayors,City Council,&City staff changes in Mayors,City Council,&City staff C6 VOTERS decide to approve Charter changes CITY COUNCIL approves City ordinance changes by ballot measure by simple 4:3 vote ANYTIME /•-. BUILDS UPON Springbrook Parks' DISMANTLES Springbrook Parks' Charter proven protections since 1978 Charter proven protections,putting it at-risk :-•a SUPPORTS:ADA-compliance,fire prevention, SUPPORTS:ADA-compliance,fire prevention, rs._ter maintenance,ecological care,stewardship maintenance,ecological care,stewardship Xx '' Our community's only opportunity to protect our natural habitats for the future! 4.A,h s LO'UEfCPAiHKS.ORG/COM PAR E Exhibit B-7 SUBSCRIBE ABOUT HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS » ABOUT Update Nov 2, 2021: Lake Oswego voters approve Measure 3-568! Measure 3-568 follows in the footsteps of families, such as the Emery’s and Shipley’s, who wished for these natural areas to remain forever wild for generations to enjoy their abundant wildlife and sanctity of nature in an ever increasing urbanized world. Lake Oswego citizens have a strong interest in protecting and expanding those elements that contribute to the natural, cultural and aesthetic health of our community. To many residents and visitors, Lake Oswego is known as a “village in a park,” a place of physical beauty and respite from expanding regional urbanization. Lake Oswego has an extensive tree canopy as a result of investment in its natural parks and open spaces. Protect Our Natural Parks came about in response to decades of City exploitation, attempted development, and an appetite to demolish land at the expense of our natural environment. During the Save Cooks Butte effort, we listened to hundreds of residents’ concerns for their neighborhood natural parks — many with no deeds, covenants, or restrictions. Whether it was Springbrook Park, Cooks Butte, Woodmont Park, Bryant Woods, or Canal Acres the City routinely considers these natural parks for development that’s inconsistent with our community’s desire to maintain them as natural habitats. Measure 3-568 was the result of an 18 month citizen initiative petition (2020IN-1) effort. Petitioners persevered through the global Covid-19 pandemic, the September 2020 wild_res, and the February 2021 ice storm and power outages to fundraise, reach out, and inform voters with personalized direct mail. Petitioners ultimately collected over 4,800 petition signatures and quali_ed with 4,433 veri_ed signatures. Measure 3-568 builds upon the City of Lake Oswego’s Charter “Chapter X – Park Development Limitation.” Chapter X was enacted bu citizen initiative in 1978 to protect Springbrook Park from being developed into a major athletic facility. Voters overwhelmingly approved to “preserve Springbrook Park as a natural area” buy a 3-1 margin. Springbrook Park is the ONLY natural area park protected in the City Charter. Measure 3-568 enhances and expands the existing Chapter X with improved development limitations and 15 additional natural parks. Additional natural parks may also be included by the City, a grantor, or voters by designating them as a “Nature Preserve.” Measure 3-568 was the ONLY citizen-initiated natural parks measure on the Lake Oswego November 2021 ballot. It was the only measure endorsed by two prominent environment and conservation organizations: Sierra Club and Oregon Wild. These organizations carefully reviewed the Citizens’ Measure 3-568 and City Council’s competing Measure 3-575 carefully and chose Measure 3-568 as the best to protect our natural habitats! Measure 3-568 was approved by voters in the November 2, 2021 Special Election. Measure 3-568 garnered 8,267 votes, or 62%, and winning by a substantial margin of 7%, or 875 votes, over City Council’s referred Measure 3-575 which garnered 7,392 votes, or 55%. When two measure compete in Oregon, the measure with the most alrmative votes becomes law. Last updated: Dec 7, 2021 Edit CONTENTS Save Waluga Park Protect Our Natural Parks About Timeline News 2020IN-1 Measure 3-568 Natural Areas Park Protections Charter Amendment Frequently Asked Questions Expand Hallinan Woods Save Cooks Butte YESONMEASURE3-568 S1 SNOORSE?OREGONWILD LOVELOPARKS ORG STAY INFORMED. GET INVOLVED.SUBSCRIBE LoveLOParks.org is managed by Lake Oswego residents who architected and supported the voter-rati_ed Chapter X – Park Development Limitation in Lake Oswego’s City Charter. LoveLOParks remains as the steward providing oversight to hold the City accountable to Lake Oswego residents. Chapter X provides legal safeguards to insure all development in a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area. Copyright 2019-23 LoveLOParks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT US OUR CAUSES LATEST NEWS RESOURCES Insights!"LoveLOParks#Customize$15%1&New+Edit Page'SEO 6 (Howdy, Love LO Parks SUBSCRIBE TIMELINE HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS » ABOUT » TIMELINE Update Nov 2, 2021: Lake Oswego voters approve Measure 3-568! Updated: Nov 2, 2021 Our citizens’ initiative petition 2020IN-1 collected over 4,800 Lake Oswego signatures (4 more signatures received September 28, 2021 — 4 months since our last mailing) and qualiUed Measure 3-568. Below is a timeline of activities. November 2, 2021. Lake Oswego voters approve Measure 3-568 in the November Special Election obtaining 62% of the vote. October 27, 2021. Measure 3-568 full-page LO Review (print edition) campaign advertisement prints with signiUcant unauthorized edits. October 22, 2021. Measure 3-568’s postcards sent to ~15,000 Lake Oswego residences. October 20, 2021. Measure 3-568’s half-page LO Review (print edition) campaign advertisement was omitted from publication. October 19 – November 2, 2021. Measure 3-568’s campaign banner runs on the LO Review website edition. October 15 – 19, 2021. 5,000 Measure 3-568 door hangers delivered across Lake Oswego neighborhoods. October 9-12, 2021. Volunteers prepare and mail 2,500 direct mail, Urst-class envelope packets to the remaining ~5,000 LO voters. September 10-27, 2021. Volunteers prepare and mail 10,000 direct mail, Urst-class envelope packets to ~22,000 LO voters. September 4, 2021. Sierra Club’s Oregon Chapter endorses Measure 3-568. August 24, 2021. Oregon Wild endorses Measure 3-568. August 20-23, 2021. Volunteers prepare and mail 2,750 direct mail, Urst-class envelope packets to ~4,800 citizen initiative 2020IN-1 petitions signers. August 3, 2021. City Council votes to forward competing referendum to the November ballot. City Council also approve purchase of Yates property to be included into Hallinan Woods. July 6, 2021. City Council recognizes 2020IN-1 has obtained enough signatures to qualify for the ballot passing Resolution 21-23: Receiving and Filing Initiative Measure 20201N-1 to Amend Chapter X of the Lake Oswego Charter to Enhance Protection of the City’ s Natural Areas. Council also directs City staff to prepare a competing referendum to be taken up at a special meeting on August 3rd. June 23, 2021. City Elections Odcer provides update that County Elections odce conUrms initiative petition meets signature threshold requirement (4,365) with 4,433 valid signatures. June 21, 2021. Submitted an additional 124 petition signatures to make up 37 signature deUcit to City Elections Odcer. Total signatures submitted 4,712. June 18, 2021. City Elections Odcer provided update from County elections odce on signature veriUcation. DeUcit of 37 signatures. June 15, 2021. Martha Bennett, City Manager, updates City Council on the status of citizen initiative 2020IN-1. Ms. Bennett presents draft referendum text (prepared by Mike Buck, Nancy Grownoski, Robert Ervin, Stefanie Wagner, Doug McKean) to compete with citizen initiative 2020IN-1 for City Council to consider. June 8, 2021. Submitted 4,588 petition signatures to City Elections Odcer. June 7, 2021. 4,588 petition signatures collected. 223 (5.1%) more than needed. June 7, 2021. Nancy Gronowski (retired landscape architect) shared their Unal text provided to Lake Oswego’s City Manager, Martha Bennett. June 4 & 6, 2021. Met with Robert Ervin, Mike Buck (Mayor’s father), Nancy Gronowski (retired landscape architect) & Doug McKean. Suggested a wholesale rewrite versus incorporating a few additions into citizen initiative petition’s charter text that had been broadly socialized in the community. Rewrite team shared eliminated substantial protections, including those protecting Springbrook for over 40 years, with many loopholes masked by nice sounding words. Informed team that a rewrite offering much less than petitioners expect wasn’t acceptable. June 1, 2021. Met with Al Calabrai and Robert Ervin to discuss citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1. Robert Ervin suggested meeting with Mike Buck, Nancy Gronowski, and Doug McKean. May 26, 2021. Personalized direct mail sent to ~2,500 households (~4,950 voters). May 21, 2021. 4,411 petition signatures collected. 46 more than needed May 1, 2021. Personalized direct mail sent to ~1,700 households (~3,200 voters). April 21, 2021. 3,500 petition signatures collected. 865 more needed. April 1, 2021. Personalized direct mail sent to ~1,300 households (~1,800 voters). March 1, 2021. Personalized direct mail sent to ~1,300 households (~1,400 voters). February 24, 2021. 3,000 petition signatures collected. 1,365 more needed. February 1, 2021. Personalized direct mail sent to ~300 households (~600 voters). January 22, 2021. Initiated new year fundraising campaign and launched fourth direct mail campaign reaching 5,000 households (~7,500 voters). November 11, 2020. 2,500 petition signatures collected. 1,865 more needed. October 1, 2020. Initiated fundraising for third direct mail campaign reaching 1,400 households (~2,400 voters). October 1, 2020. Petition circulation efforts resume. September 25, 2020. City Council unanimously approved a resolution to acquire the Yates property for preservation as a natural habitat. September 2, 2020. Coordinated community awareness campaign with Coalition for Hallinan Woods Nature Park to save a wooded 2-acre private parcel adjacent to Hallinan Woods from becoming a 6 home development. July 12, 2020. Started outreach efforts to introduce citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 to candidates for Mayor and City Council. March 13, 2020 – October 1, 2020. Pandemic Pause – suspended petition circulation for the safety of petitioners and the community due to Covid-19 pandemic petition. February 29, 2020. 2,000 petition signatures collected. 2,365 more needed. February 2, 2020. Initiated 2nd fundraising campaign and launched second-phase in the direct mail campaign targeting another 3,800 households (~6,800 registered voters). January 29, 2020. Scott Handley met with Stephanie Wagner to discuss citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1. Stephanie acknowledged Springbrook has beneUted from charter protection and that other natural parks should as well. They reviewed the charter text together with Stephanie only minor clariUcations and no real concerns. Stephanie agreed to discuss bringing Mike Buck, Paul Lyons and others together to see if there could be a path forward. January 27, 2020. 1,000 petition signatures collected. 3,365 more needed. January 20, 2020. Reviewed opposition’s misleading statements published in LO Review with attorney. Advised statements were ill-informed and not relective of the amendments intent as speciUed in the full-text. January 14, 2020. Phone call with Mike Buck. Mike unwilling to consider the need for a charter amendment. January 9, 2020. Shared citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 at the Hallinan Neighborhood Association meeting. January 7, 2020. Launched a fundraiser for direct mail campaign targeting 5,000 Lake Oswego households (~12,500 registered voters) to drive awareness and support for citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1. January 6, 2020. Consulted Clackamas County Elections about a direct mail campaign to Lake Oswego registered voters. Received conUrmation on approach that included sending initiative petition’s full-text. Ordered Lake Oswego voter roll to prepare for direct mail campaign. December 28, 2019. Scott Handley met with Mike Buck and Charles Fisher to discuss citizen initiative 2020IN-1. Mike and Charles implored to abandon these efforts and that steward groups have great working relationship with City. Scott acknowledged the great work done by stewards but expressed those are not sudcient to legally protect our natural parks from development. This was the concern expressed by hundreds of residents. December 27, 2019. City Councilor Theresa Kohlhoff acknowledges the merits of citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1, referring to protections granted Springbrook Park, and sends her signed petition. December 18, 2019. Provided the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Advisory Board a status update on prospective initiative 2020IN-1. December 17, 2019. Introduced citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 to City Council during Citizen Comment and invited Councilors to participate in the conversation and embrace the initiative petition’s sensible development limitations. December 12, 2019. Launched citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 campaign. NotiUed email subscribers to download the single-signer petition, print it, sign it, and mail it back. Also started volunteer petition circulation efforts within neighborhoods and at public locations. December 12, 2019. Lake Oswego City Recorder certiUes Petition Cover Sheet, Petition Sheet, and Electronic Petition Sheet (e-sheet). December 7, 2019. Attended Lake Oswego Neighborhood Action Coalition (LONAC) and presented citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1. Members receptive and discussion was positive. December 2-12, 2019. Public notice period for ballot title per Oregon statue. December 2, 2019. Lake Oswego City Attorney assigned our citizen initiative petition’s ballot title and published on the City’s website. State statute requires City Attorney to assign local initiative ballot titles. November 22, 2019. Reviewed citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1’s text with the Lake Oswego’s City Attorney and Director of Parks and Recreation at City Hall. November 21, 2019. Lake Oswego City Recorder conUrms (via email and certiUed mail) that Petition for Ballot Initiative meets Oregon’s constitutional requirements. November 20, 2019. Attended Lake Oswego’s Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Advisory Board’s monthly meeting and presented proposed park development limitation initiative. Board was receptive and discussion was positive. November 14, 2019. Submitted Petition for Ballot Initiative to revise Chapter X – Park Development Limitation with Lake Oswego’s City Recorder (Anne-Marie Simpson). Petition ID 2020IN-1 assigned. November 6, 2019. Met with Lake Oswego’s Director of Parks and Recreation, to review the community-led proposal for a City Charter amendment to protect natural area parks. He seemed comfortable with the language. He suggested: – clarifying types of prohibited hardscape surfaces (eg. asphalt & concrete) since decomposed granite is a suitable alternative surface used across the country in natural areas to meet ADA compliance. – allowing implementation of adopted park master plans – including 5 additional natural areas to the chapter’s protections: — Cornell Natural Area — Glenmorrie Greenway — Kerr Open Space — Steven’s Homestead (added to Stevens Meadow deUnition) — Waluga Park -West. These were reasonable requests and incorporated into the amendment text. November 5, 2019. Unveiled the park development limitation initiative at or Protect LO Natural Parks public event at the Lake Theater. Solicited feedback from over 200 attendees. Launched the LoveLOParks website for communicating the prospective initiative throughout the community. November 1, 2019. Met with co-chairs, Bill Gordon and Heidi Schrimsher, of the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Advisory Board to review the charter amendment text and incorporated feedback. October 26, 2019. Mailed all Neighborhood Association Chairs informing them of the Protect LO Natural Parks prospective charter amendment and asked for feedback on the list of natural areas and development limitations. Woodmont Nature Park & Cornell Natural Area recommended. October 19 – October 27, 2019. Conducted a NextDoor poll “Shall the Lake Oswego Charter be amended to preserve all current and future natural parks as natural areas for the enjoyment of all residents and visitors to Lake Oswego — free from any facility that would otherwise impair their natural state?” – Out of 291 respondents, 89% in favor / 11% opposed October 1 – 31, 2019. Drafted and reviewed the City Charter Amendment to Chapter X – Park Development Limitation with interested parties in the community. – Reviewed City’s website, park master plans, available deeds, Open Space Plan (2001), Parks Plan 2025 (2013), and the Lake Oswego Code – Included 9 natural areas in addition to Springbrook Park (10 total) – Included additional development limitations in natural areas – Included expectation on maintenance improvements for providing healthy habitats – Improved methods to include additional natural areas in the future – Reviewed preliminary text with land-use attorney. September 2019. Conversation with Uplands couple about Springbrook Park and how citizens in the 70’s enacted a Charter amendment to protect the natural park from high-density housing and a major athletic facility. Edit CONTENTS Save Waluga Park Protect Our Natural Parks About Timeline News 2020IN-1 Measure 3-568 Natural Areas Park Protections Charter Amendment Frequently Asked Questions Expand Hallinan Woods Save Cooks Butte STAY INFORMED. GET INVOLVED.SUBSCRIBE LoveLOParks.org is managed by Lake Oswego residents who architected and supported the voter-ratiUed Chapter X – Park Development Limitation in Lake Oswego’s City Charter. LoveLOParks remains as the steward providing oversight to hold the City accountable to Lake Oswego residents. Chapter X provides legal safeguards to insure all development in a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area. Copyright 2019-23 LoveLOParks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT US OUR CAUSES LATEST NEWS RESOURCES Insights!"LoveLOParks#Customize$15%1&New+Edit Page'SEO 6 (Howdy, Love LO Parks SUBSCRIBE NEWS HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS » NEWS Update Nov 2, 2021: Lake Oswego voters approve Measure 3-568! In the News Edit CONTENTS Save Waluga Park Protect Our Natural Parks About News 2020IN-1 Measure 3-568 Natural Areas Park Protections Charter Amendment Frequently Asked Questions Expand Hallinan Woods Save Cooks Butte Mayor says City will recognize will of voters January 19, 2022 Mayor Buck opened yesterday’s City Council meeting with a statement regarding Measure 3-568. While not a formal apology for City… Read More LoveLOParks Steering Committee Condemns City Council’s Rebuke of Voters January 15, 2022 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – January 15, 2022 – LoveLOParks Steering Committee issues statements condemning Lake Oswego City… Read More Council should elevate discussion on park measure January 12, 2022 City Councilors contemptuously berating citizens for their majority vote on initiative 3-568 as being stupid and they should feel ashamed… Read More Vote for parks is historic moment November 11, 2021 With the passage of the citizens’ Measure 3-568, Lake Oswego voters have chosen to leave an everlasting legacy of wilderness… Read More Citizen-initiated Measure 3-568 Passes! November 2, 2021 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – November 2, 2021 – LoveLOParks announces Citizen-initiated Measure 3-568 passes to enact legal… Read More LoveLOParks: Vote YES on Citizens’ Measure 3- 568 October 27, 2021 On behalf of every volunteer, donor, and 4,800+ petition signers, the LoveLOParks Steering Committee hopes you’ll join us and vote… Read More Let’s keep our promises October 27, 2021 As 32+ year residents of Lake Oswego, it pains us to think that we can’t trust Lake Oswego City Council…. Read More What would Marjorie do? October 27, 2021 In 1993 I purchased the farmstead from Marjorie and John Emery that bordered the 42 acre Cooks Butte Park that… Read More Don’t miss chance to protect parks October 27, 2021 I am a research scientist with over 25 years of experience examining the many factors that affect water quality. I… Read More Facts and the future October 27, 2021 I’ve had several interesting conversations with my young granddaughter where we’ve talked about the upcoming election and the two competing… Read More Measure 3-568 is gift for the future October 27, 2021 “Don’t it always seem to go … You don’t know what you’ve got ‘till it’s gone …” The notion of… Read More Not confused on measures October 27, 2021 My Voters’ Pamphlet and ballot arrived today. I found it surprising the stark contrast between the quality in the explanatory… Read More Voters deserve the facts October 27, 2021 Did you receiving a text on behalf of Measure 3-575 this week asking to support a citizen-guided initiative to preserve… Read More Don’t let politicians exploit parks, natural areas October 27, 2021 As a 28 year resident of Lake Oswego, please don’t be confused. Don’t let the Lake Oswego politicians exploit our… Read More Citizens Taking Initiative October 20, 2021 Springbrook Park, Canal Acres, Bryant Woods, Cooks Butte, and Stevens Meadows are examples of natural habitats within our neighborhoods resulting… Read More No accident October 13, 2021 Oregon Wild and the Sierra Club’s Oregon Chapter chose to endorse Citizens’ Measure 3-568. Let that sink in. These organizations… Read More Don’t be fooled by city measure October 13, 2021 They paved Paradise and put up a parking lot! The politicians are up to their old shenanigans. This November there… Read More Measures couldn’t be more different October 13, 2021 One would think that Lake Oswego citizens have two reasonable measures to protect our natural parks. Digging deeper, you’ll jnd… Read More Save your right to vote October 13, 2021 Look at the so called “Nature Park” on Iron Mountain Road next to the Hunt Club. Where is the natural… Read More Look to Woodmont when considering measures October 13, 2021 Woodmont Natural Park would be in a more natural state as life-long resident Donald Meyer had intended under citizen-initiated Measure… Read More Citizens’ measure would fully protect parks October 6, 2021 I have done my research into the competing parks measures. 3-568 (citizens’ initiative) was written with the full and clear… Read More The Devil’s in the details October 6, 2021 LO voters have an important decision on the direction to take to protect our natural parks this November. This isn’t… Read More Measure 3-568 has integrity October 6, 2021 Residents have been working hard for at least 18 months, as a part of a grass roots effort, to get… Read More Don’t be fooled October 6, 2021 We can’t trust the City of LO to protect our natural parks. Three times since 1993 the City has tried… Read More Vote to truly protect parks October 6, 2021 Initiative 3-568 better protects our natural area parks than the City’s Referendum 3-575. Initiative 3-568 places the current natural park… Read More Concrete and asphalt are not the only ways to make an ADA trail October 3, 2021 My young adult kids have mobility issues and sometimes they use wheelchairs. Measure 3-568 does NOT connict with Federal ADA… Read More Stop the Confusion October 2, 2021 As 32+ year residents of Lake Oswego, it pains us to think that we can no longer trust the Lake… Read More O[cials’ actions on natural parks don’t match words September 29, 2021 Do “actions speak louder than words”? Now “misinformation” and “malinformation” are amplijed louder. As an environmental scientist, I respectfully ask… Read More Support citizens’ parks measure September 29, 2021 The citizens’ Measure 3-568 will provide all our natural parks the same protections that Spring-brook has. It does so by… Read More Measure would protect LO beauty September 29, 2021 600 acres of parkland, 460 acres of natural and open space areas, and our homes surrounded by tall jr trees… Read More Rainbow Terrace Endorses Measure 3- 568 September 28, 2021 Rainbow Terrance is a subdivision in the Uplands Neighborhood nestled between Boones Ferry Rd, the tennis center, and Springbrook Park…. Read More City referendum is attack on citizen initiative September 22, 2021 I am disturbed by the city’s referendum which would strip away Springbrook Park’s charter protection — and preclude this protection… Read More Of sparrows, zombie \res and the tipping point September 16, 2021 In this week’s LO Review, Pierre Zubrinsky’s Citizen View asks “Does our City Council not yet recognize the severity of… Read More Protect our parks September 16, 2021 “There is so little we can count on these days. I’d like to think that walking in our local parks… Read More Sierra Club’s Oregon Chapter Endorses Measure 3-568 September 4, 2021 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – September 4, 2021 – LoveLOParks is pleased to announce that, after careful review… Read More Does Lake Oswego really want to protect its parks? August 25, 2021 In this week’s LO Review, a Letter to the Editor submitted by Jean Eves — a long time Uplands Neighborhood… Read More Oregon Wild Endorses Measure 3-568 August 24, 2021 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – August 24, 2021 – LoveLOParks is pleased to announce that Oregon Wild has… Read More LoveLOParks Petitions Circuit Court to Review City of Lake Oswego’s Ballot Title August 13, 2021 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – August 13, 2021 – On behalf of LoveLOParks, Scott Handley jled a petition… Read More City Council Will Forward Competing Referendum August 4, 2021 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – August 4, 2021 – Love Lake Oswego Parks Committee is disappointed to announce… Read More Community Members’ Public Comments – RE: Agenda Item- Resolution 21-29 August 3, 2021 Over 50 Lake Oswego residents sent public comments to today’s City Council meeting asking City Council to reject a City… Read More Scott Handley’s Public Comments – RE: Agenda Item- Resolution 21-29 August 3, 2021 Below are Scott Handley’s public comments asking City Council to reject referring a City referendum to the November 2021 ballot… Read More Betsy Wosko’s Public Comments – RE: Agenda Item- Resolution 21-29 August 3, 2021 Below are Betsy Wosko’s public comments asking City Council to reject referring a City referendum to the November 2021 ballot… Read More Wide Support for Citizen Initiative Petition 2020IN-1 August 1, 2021 Updated: August 1, 2021 On June 23, 2023, the Clackamas County Elections Osce certijed that our citizen initiative petition, 2020IN-1,… Read More Thanks For Doing This!! July 15, 2021 Citizens from all across Lake Oswego have signed our citizen initiative petition, 2020IN-1, to protect our natural parks from development… Read More Evaluating options on park measures July 15, 2021 THERESA KOHLHOFF’sREADER’S LETTER The city is considering a referendum against a citizen’s initiative, Love LO Parks. The only park that… Read More Citizen Initiative 2020IN-1 Quali\es for the November 2021 Ballot July 7, 2021 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – July 7, 2021 – Love Lake Oswego Parks Committee is pleased to announce… Read More City Council Recognizes & Files 2020IN-1 July 6, 2021 Per Oregon statute, on July 6, 2021, the Lake Oswego City Council adopted Resolution 21-23 thereby recognizing our citizen initiative… Read More Love LO Parks measure will appear on November ballot July 2, 2021 Clara Howell’s LO Review article (posted online July 2nd), “Love LO Parks measure will appear on the November ballot,” is… Read More Quali\ed! June 23, 2021 Great news!Our citizen initiative petition limiting development in 15 natural parks has been certijed by the Clackamas county elections osce… Read More City Council Discusses 2020IN-1 June 15, 2021 On June 15, 2021, Lake Oswego City Council discussed agenda item “7.3 Proposed Natural Areas Preservation Charter Referendum.” Martha Bennett, the… Read More Every Signature’s Important June 9, 2021 “It’s surely our responsibility to do everything within our power to create a planet that provides a home not just… Read More Don’t take LO natural areas for granted October 7, 2020 CLAIRE PUCHY’SCITIZEN’s VIEW The recent wildjres are a reminder of how precious our environment is to humans, as well as… Read More Act locally, impact globally October 7, 2020 MEGAN BUSBEE’SREADER’S LETTER Nausea, tightened chest, headaches and anxiety were my symptoms from the relentless toxic wildjre smoke that eerily… Read More The debate is over, action is required now September 30, 2020 “You cannot get through a single day without having an impact on the world around you. What you do makes… Read More Woodmont A Natural Park No More August 16, 2020 Shocking photos of Woodmont Natural Park, located in the Forest Highlands Neighborhood, shared by a neighbor who is disappointed at… Read More Owners vs. Caretakers April 15, 2020 LO citizens: I encourage all of you over the next few days/weeks to take some time to renect upon the… Read More Happy 45th Birthday Cooks Butte Nature Park! April 4, 2020 On April 4, 1975, John and Marjorie Emery deeded the 42 acres we know as Cooks Butte Nature Park to… Read More Reader’s Letter- The parks, the people and the future March 12, 2020 LESLIE EMERY’SREADERS’ LETTER I am one of three sons of Marjorie Emery. It was Marjorie whose profound love of nature,… Read More Lake Oswego’s Cooks’ Butte (VIDEO) March 5, 2020 (What mysteries await us at the top?) Just on the other side of Stafford Hamlet… In this episode of Around… Read More Dear Neighbors… February 6, 2020 Dear Neighbors, Last September, our Palisades neighbors were confronted with insurmountable odds to protect Cook’s Butte for the 3rd time… Read More Save LO Parks initiative: Remember McCall February 6, 2020 Betsy Wosko reminds us about Oregon’s Comprehensive Plan and its priority for community involvement as a necessary balancing force against… Read More Charter protection shouldn’t be exclusive to Springbrook January 30, 2020 The Friends of Springbrook Park Board’s letter in the LO Review this week, “Please do not support LoveLOParks charter petition,”… Read More Our Numbers Tell A Different Story January 24, 2020 Doug McKean’s Citizen’s View in this week’s LO Review, “Opposition grows to initiative by LoveLOParks,” is another attempt to mislead… Read More Our Charter Amendment Is The Better Way January 17, 2020 Nancy Gronowski’s Citizen’s View, “Don’t be fooled by LoveLOParks: There’s a better way”, misrepresents our citizen-led initiative with misleading commentary… Read More Our Community Should Decide January 16, 2020 Rosemary DiCandilo offers a perspective on Lake Oswego’s natural areas and builds a case to protect them from future City… Read More Citizen’s View- We must protect our natural areas January 9, 2020 Scott Handley, a Lake Oswego resident and the chief petitioner for the community-led prospective initiative 2020IN-1, outlines the necessity to… Read More Letter to the Editor- Welcome 2020 by helping protect LO natural areas January 9, 2020 Kirsten Sommer offers the community to start the new year on a positive note and protect Lake Oswego’s natural areas… Read More Tues, 12/17 @ 3:00 PM: Citizen Comment December 17, 2019 Scott Handley, Chief Petitioner, introduced the community’s prospective petition initiative, 2020IN-1, to City Council. After Scott’s comments, several Councilors asked… Read More Citizen Initiative Petition 2020IN-1 Receives Approval to Circulate December 12, 2019 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – December 12, 2019 – Love Lake Oswego Parks Committee is pleased to announce… Read More Prospective Petition for a Local Initiative Meets Constitutional Provisions November 14, 2019 LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – November 14, 2019 – Love Lake Oswego Parks Committee is pleased to announce that Lake Oswego’s… Read More Emery’s Rescind Consent for Telecommunications Tower at Cooks Butte November 6, 2019 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon – November 6, 2019 – Save Cooks Butte announced two major developments at our… Read More STAY INFORMED. GET INVOLVED.SUBSCRIBE LoveLOParks.org is managed by Lake Oswego residents who architected and supported the voter-ratijed Chapter X – Park Development Limitation in Lake Oswego’s City Charter. LoveLOParks remains as the steward providing oversight to hold the City accountable to Lake Oswego residents. Chapter X provides legal safeguards to insure all development in a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area. Copyright 2019-23 LoveLOParks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT US OUR CAUSES LATEST NEWS RESOURCES Insights!"LoveLOParks#Customize$15%1&New+Edit Page'SEO 6 (Howdy, Love LO Parks SUBSCRIBE MEASURE 3-568 HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS » MEASURE 3-568 Update Nov 2, 2021: Lake Oswego voters approve Measure 3-568! Lake Oswego citizens began circulating citizen initiative petition 2020IN-1 in December 2019. For 18-months, hundreds of residents volunteered thousands of hours and donated $28,000+ to reach, inform, and educate the Lake Oswego community about the legal protections we seek for these natural areas. 2020IN-1 needed signatures from 15% of Lake Oswego’s registered voters, or 4,365 signatures, to qualify for the ballot; we collected over 4,800 signatures and quali\ed with 4,433 veri\ed signatures on June 23, 2021, resulting in Citizens’ Measure 3-568. Measure 3-568 amends the City of Lake Oswego’s Charter Chapter X – Park Development Limitation to protect Springbrook Park and 15 additional natural parks with sensible development limitations to keep these natural parks safe, accessible, healthy, and vibrant natural habitats. Measure 3-568 was endorsed by two prominent environment and conservation organizations, Oregon Wild and Sierra Club, on August 24th and Sept 4th, respectively, after carefully vetting the Citizens’ Measure 3-568 and City Council’s referred Measure 3-575. Citizens are pursuing strong legal charter protections due to frustrations with repeated City attempts to develop and/or encroach upon one or more of our natural parks (Springbrook Park, Bryant Woods, Woodmont Park, Cooks Butte, amongst others) and a tedious public process that minimizes citizens involvement and voice. One recent example: Cooks Butte was deeded to the City in 1975 by the Emery family for the purposes of remaining a natural habitat. The City has pursued development a top Cooks Butte 3 times (1994, 2002, and 2019) for a major telecommunications facility. Citizens strongly opposed each attempt and with the Emery family’s assistance, development was prevented and this natural habitat untouched (for now). The current Chapter X – Park Development Limitation was placed on the ballot by citizen initiative and rati\ed in 1978 to “preserve Springbrook Park as a natural area” and prevent the City from developing it into high-density housing and a major athletic facility. Chapter X, which currently only applies to Springbrook Park: Prohibits athletic facilities, parking lots, and roads or trails for motorized vehicles. Allows trails for hiking, jogging, horseback, and bicycle riding. Allows picnic and sanitary facilities. Allows for restrictions to apply to any park property acquired by bond and designated by voters as subject to these restrictions. A YES vote on Measure 3-568 would maintain (black text) and enhance (blue text) Chapter X’s development limitations: Designates these natural parks as “Nature Preserves:” Bryant Woods Park, Canal Acres, Cooks Butte Park, Cornell Natural Area, Glenmorrie Greenway, Hallinan Woods, Iron Mountain Park, Kerr Open Space, Lamont Springs Natural Area, River Run, South Shore Natural Area, Springbrook Park, Stevens Homestead, Stevens Meadows, West Waluga Park, and Woodmont Natural Park. Prohibits athletic facilities, parking lots, and roads or trails for motorized vehicles. Prohibits telecommunications facilities, asphalt and concrete hard-surface trails, and above-ground facilities or structures that would impair or be inconsistent with natural conditions. Prohibits tree cutting for purposes of commercial logging. Allows trails for hiking, jogging, horseback, and bicycle riding. Allows picnic and sanitary facilities Allows benches, boardwalks, and interpretive displays. Allows maintenance for ecological restoration that provides safe and healthy natural areas that are accessible for public enjoyment, provides a healthy habitat for wildlife, eliminates invasive species, restores native species, and mitigates \re hazards. Allows maintenance of existing facilities, structures, parking lots, roads or trails for motorized vehicle if not altered in any manner that would further impair or be inconsistent with natural conditions. Allows implementation of pre-existing park-speci\c master plans adopted prior to November 3, 2021 that may specify development that would otherwise be restricted by this Chapter. Allows for restrictions to apply to any park property acquired by bond and designated by voters as subject to these restrictions or if designated as a “Nature Preserve” by the conveying property owners, the City, or voters. Any new master plan for parks designated as “Nature Preserves” must be consistent with the charter amendment. Citizens’ Measure 3-568 allows natural park trail construction using ADA compliant materials, such as tightly-packed decomposed granite (or other suitable material), and boardwalks that are more compatible in natural areas and used broadly in national, state, and city wilderness areas and natural parks across the country. Citizens’ Measure 3-568 DOES NOT impose any additional taxes. After citizens \led this initiative with 4,433 qualifying signatures for the ballot, the Lake Oswego City Council referred competing Measure 3-575 to the ballot. While City Council’s Measure3-575 lists many of the same parks for designation as “Natural Areas” within 60 days of rati\cation by ordinance, it would allow the City to partition those parks into “Natural Areas” and areas subject to development. The City Council’s Measure 3-575 would also allow development of parking lots, roads, and other facilities or structures, including the removal of park trees for this development, through the City’s public master planning process. For Measure 3-568 to become law, Measure 3-568 must receive a majority vote and more YES votes than Lake Oswego City Council’s competing Measure 3-575. BALLOT TITLE Our Citizens’ Measure 3-568‘s ballot title will be: CAPTION: Restricts improvements on certain Lake Oswego park properties QUESTION: Should the Lake Oswego City Charter be amended to restrict improvements on certain city park properties? Measure 3-568‘s ballot title was assigned by the City Attorney when our citizens initiative petition 2020IN-1 was approved for circulation in December 2019 and cannot, unfortunately, be changed. We believe it was written intentionally to stall our petition signature collection efforts and to confuse Lake Oswego voters. Citizens have not been confused. Learn more about Measure 3-568: Facts vs Myths Frequently Asked Questions Measure 3-568 Flyer Measure 3-568 Poster Compare Citizens’ Measure 3-568 & City Council’s Measure 3-575 Measure 3-568’s Charter Chapter X Text Edit CONTENTS Save Waluga Park Protect Our Natural Parks About News 2020IN-1 Measure 3-568 Endorsements Facts Flyers Poster Compare 3-568 & 3-575 Natural Areas Park Protections Charter Amendment Frequently Asked Questions Expand Hallinan Woods Save Cooks Butte VOTEYESONMEASURE3-568 PROTECTOURNATURALPARKSENDORSED! SERRACLOS S OREGONWILD ANDORSES Prominentenvironmentand conservationorganizationschose Citizens'Measure3-568! LOVELOPARKS.ORG LED&FUNDED BYCITIZENS,FORCITIZENS NOTDEVELOPERS STAY INFORMED. GET INVOLVED.SUBSCRIBE LoveLOParks.org is managed by Lake Oswego residents who architected and supported the voter-rati\ed Chapter X – Park Development Limitation in Lake Oswego’s City Charter. LoveLOParks remains as the steward providing oversight to hold the City accountable to Lake Oswego residents. Chapter X provides legal safeguards to insure all development in a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area. Copyright 2019-23 LoveLOParks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT US OUR CAUSES LATEST NEWS RESOURCES Insights!"LoveLOParks#Customize$15%1&New+Edit Page'SEO 6 (Howdy, Love LO Parks SUBSCRIBE ENDORSEMENTS HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS » MEASURE 3-568 » ENDORSEMENTS Update Nov 2, 2021: Lake Oswego voters approve Measure 3-568! Measure 3-568 was the only citizen-initiated natural parks measure on the Lake Oswego November 2021 Special Election ballot endorsed by two prominent Oregon environment and conservation organizations. These organizations scrutinized both measures through their rigorous endorsement process and chose Measure 3-568 as the best to protect Lake Oswego natural areas. “Sierra Club proudly endorses Measure 3-568. The measure, if passed, will deUne natural park boundaries enabling the protection of natural habitats, while supporting accessibility of these areas for public enjoyment. The measure also creates mechanisms to better enable citizens to take part in critical decisions related to 15 natural parks. One of Sierra Club’s missions is “to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment”, and we wholeheartedly support this grassroots citizen-initiated measure that seeks to do just that.” — Oregon Chapter, Sierra Club Read the press release. “Since 1974, Oregon Wild has worked to protect and restore Oregon’s wildlands, wildlife, and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations. We support Lake Oswego Measure 3-568 as a citizen-led, grassroots effort to protect and preserve the ecological values, public access, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities provided by Lake Oswego’s parks.” — Oregon Wild Read the press release. ··· In addition to these prestigious endorsements, Lake Oswego residents from every neighborhood have continually expressed their gratitude for our grassroots effort to protect our natural parks, including the Emery descendants of John and Marjorie Emery (grantors of Cooks Butte). Read more: Thanks for doing this Public Comments in Support of Measure 3-568 Rainbow Terrace Endorses Measure 3-568 Les Emery – The parks, the people the future Suzanne Emery – Owners vs Caretakers Last updated: Nov 5, 2021 Edit CONTENTS Save Waluga Park Protect Our Natural Parks About News 2020IN-1 Measure 3-568 Endorsements Facts Flyers Poster Compare 3-568 & 3-575 Natural Areas Park Protections Charter Amendment Frequently Asked Questions Expand Hallinan Woods Save Cooks Butte STAY INFORMED. GET INVOLVED.SUBSCRIBE LoveLOParks.org is managed by Lake Oswego residents who architected and supported the voter-ratiUed Chapter X – Park Development Limitation in Lake Oswego’s City Charter. LoveLOParks remains as the steward providing oversight to hold the City accountable to Lake Oswego residents. Chapter X provides legal safeguards to insure all development in a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area. Copyright 2019-23 LoveLOParks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT US OUR CAUSES LATEST NEWS RESOURCES Insights!"LoveLOParks#Customize$15%1&New+Edit Page'SEO 6 (Howdy, Love LO Parks SUBSCRIBE FLYERS HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS » MEASURE 3-568 » FLYERS Measure 3-568 vs Measure 3-575 Informational Flyer Measure 3-568 Myths vs Facts Measure 3-568 vs Measure 3-575 Door Hanger Measure 3-568 vs Measure 3-575 Postcard Edit CONTENTS Save Waluga Park Protect Our Natural Parks About News 2020IN-1 Measure 3-568 Endorsements Facts Flyers Poster Compare 3-568 & 3-575 Natural Areas Park Protections Charter Amendment Frequently Asked Questions Expand Hallinan Woods Save Cooks Butte STAY INFORMED. GET INVOLVED.SUBSCRIBE LoveLOParks.org is managed by Lake Oswego residents who architected and supported the voter-ratiYed Chapter X – Park Development Limitation in Lake Oswego’s City Charter. LoveLOParks remains as the steward providing oversight to hold the City accountable to Lake Oswego residents. Chapter X provides legal safeguards to insure all development in a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area. Copyright 2019-23 LoveLOParks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT US OUR CAUSES LATEST NEWS RESOURCES Insights!"LoveLOParks#Customize$15%1&New+Edit Page'SEO 6 (Howdy, Love LO Parks SUBSCRIBE COMPARE 3-568 & 3-575 HOME » CAUSES » PROTECT OUR NATURAL PARKS » MEASURE 3-568 » COMPARE 3-568 & 3-575 Update Nov 2, 2021: Lake Oswego voters approve Measure 3-568! Lake Oswego voters have two measures to consider for protecting our natural parks. While they sound similar, they couldn’t be further apart in the legal mechanisms used to ensure lasting, long-term protections for these natural habitats. Voters should review the proposed Chapter X texts for both two measures to make the best, informed decision. Measure 3-568 (Citizen initiated) & Measure 3-575 (City Council referred) Compared Current Chapter X (Springbrook Only) Measures 3-568 & 3-575 Charter Text Side-by-Side Comparison with Commentary* *Comparing the actual charter text shows signiXcant language and legal differences Quick Reference: Comparing Chapter X, Measures 3-568 & 3-575 Voters’ Pamphlet Key Legal Differences Measure 3-568 Citizen Initiated (Charter Text, HTML) Protects Our Natural Parks LED & FUNDED by citizens for citizens & preserving our LO way of life ENDORSED by prominent environment and conservation organizations: Sierra Club & Oregon Wild STRONG Charter protections using legally explicit safeguards FOCUSES on development limitations in the Charter EXPLICITLY deXnes 16 natural parks, their acreage & boundaries in the Charter Charter provides LONG-TERM strong protection from political motives & changes in Mayors, City Council, & City staff VOTERS decide to approve Charter changes by ballot measure BUILDS UPON Springbrook Parks’ Charter proven protections since 1978 SUPPORTS: ADA-compliance, Xre prevention, maintenance, ecological care, stewardship Charter text mailed to 14,000+ Lake Oswego households (~27,000 registered voters) between January 2020 – May 2021 for initiative petition 2020IN-1; 4,800+ residents signed the petition Quick Reference: Measure 3-568 Measure 3-575 City Council Referred (Charter Text) Risks Our Natural Parks LED & FUNDED by developers, city interests & political ahliates ($10,000 from Renaissance Homes) NOT ENDORSED by prominent environment and conservation organizations. WEAK Charter protections using City ordinances DOES NOT LIMIT development; allows tree removal & parking lots DEFERS deXning natural parks, their acreage & boundaries by City ordinance & AFTER we vote Ordinances provide SHORT-TERM limited protection from political motives & changes in Mayors, City Council, & City staff CITY COUNCIL approves City ordinance changes by simple 4:3 vote ANYTIME DISMANTLES Springbrook Parks’ Charter protections, putting it at-risk SUPPORTS: ADA-compliance, Xre prevention, maintenance, ecological care, stewardship Charter text not socialized with the public and dihcult to Xnd in City records repository City’s “public” process in July with PraxisPolitical introduced no improvements to the Charter text presented to City Council on June 15, 2021, and that approved on Aug 3, 2021. June 15 vs August 3 Side-by-Side Comparison Edit CONTENTS Save Waluga Park Protect Our Natural Parks About News 2020IN-1 Measure 3-568 Endorsements Facts Flyers Poster Compare 3-568 & 3-575 Natural Areas Park Protections Charter Amendment Frequently Asked Questions Expand Hallinan Woods Save Cooks Butte STAY INFORMED. GET INVOLVED.SUBSCRIBE LoveLOParks.org is managed by Lake Oswego residents who architected and supported the voter-ratiXed Chapter X – Park Development Limitation in Lake Oswego’s City Charter. LoveLOParks remains as the steward providing oversight to hold the City accountable to Lake Oswego residents. Chapter X provides legal safeguards to insure all development in a Nature Preserve is consistent with the preservation of a Nature Preserve as a natural area. Copyright 2019-23 LoveLOParks, All Right Reserved ! info@loveloparks.org "#$%& ABOUT US OUR CAUSES LATEST NEWS RESOURCES Insights!"LoveLOParks#Customize$15%1&New+Edit Page'SEO 6 (Howdy, Love LO Parks