HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/03/2014 Work SessionCity of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2014
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, February 3, 2014 at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg
presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and Brew. Also
present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Mary
Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
Councilor Wylie was absent (excused)
1. Sewer Assessment Alternatives — Franklin/McVay Sanitary Sewer Extension Project 4P21080
City Engineer Ken Vogeney presented the staff report on this item. The Sewer in Lieu of Assessment
Fee was authorized under Chapter 3.356 of the Springfield Municipal Code and the rate was
established through Council adoption of the Master Fees and Charges Schedule. This fee provided a
mechanism for the City to assess a share of the cost to provide sewers from properties that did not
participate in the construction of the sewer mains adjacent to their property.
The existing fee formula provided in Chapter 3.356 (3) would result in collecting significantly more
funds from developed parcels adjacent to the proposed McVay trunk line than necessary to pay for the
line when this project was completed. This may discourage these properties from annexing to the City
and connecting to the public sewer service in a timely manner and could hamper redevelopment in the
McVay Highway corridor in the future.
Staff provided three options for Council to consider if they desired to assess property owners along
McVay Highway differently than the current fee formula and rate provided. Staff recommended
Alternative 3, establishing a separate rate structure for Sewer in Lieu of Assessment Fee on the
Franklin/McVay Sanitary Sewer Extension Project that would collect an equitable share of the cost to
provide wastewater service to the benefitted properties.
Mr. Vogeney said the Franklin/McVay Sanitary Sewer Extension Project would construct a trunk
sewer that was both larger and deeper than the minimum needed to serve any one property, since the
intent was to serve a large portion of the eastern half of Glenwood. Typically, direct connections from
a property to a trunk sewer had not been allowed. Instead, connections were made to local wastewater
mains (typically 8 -inch pipes) located in side streets which then connected to the trunk sewer. When
these local mains were constructed and paid for through redevelopment, the property owners would
have met their obligation to construct their portion of the public system and thus would not be charged
a Sewer in Lieu of Assessment Fee.
Along McVay Highway, however, the properties were not currently configured in a way that would
allow for the logical extension of wastewater mains to serve the properties. The existing properties
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 3, 2014
Page 2
were a mixture of large and small lots with very few side streets branching off of McVay Highway for
sewers to be installed in the future.
As a result, most of the properties along McVay Highway could be connected directly into the trunk
sewer with their individual lateral lines, and thus would not have met their obligation to construct their
portion of the public system. These properties would then be subject to the Sewer in Lieu of
Assessment Fee as authorized under Municipal Code Chapter 3.356(3).
Mr. Vogeney noted the three options being presented and discussed the pros and cons:
1. Do not assess for this specific sewer construction project
2. Amend Municipal Code Chapter 3.356(3) to provide for more options for assessing fees
3. Adopt a resolution to set fees specific to this project that more equitably distribute costs
.4. Apply the current formula to this project
Councilor Brew asked if the $600,000 was the cost to place an 8" line all along McVay.
Mr. Vogeney said it would not be the full length., He referred to a map showing the stretch of road that
would be subject to assessment and noted that many of the properties would not be subject to the fee
as they were already annexed into the City.
Councilor Brew asked if the trunk sewer was on the list of system development charge (SDC) projects.
Yes. He asked about how the full project was to be funded.
Mr. Vogeney said the project to be constructed was slightly different than the project on the SDC
project list. This project had over 6000 feet of pipe, some 8" and some 15 ". All of the cost would be
deducted from the SDC calculation.
Councilor Brew asked if the property owners could get a credit if the full amount of $JAM was
charged when the property was redeveloped.
Mr. Vogeney said the SDC credit would apply if that developer built the pipe to a larger size. Since
the City was building the pipe and having it in place ready for connections, there would be no credit.
The property owners would be paying full SDC charges with any of the options presented. The
question was whether or not they would be charged an assessment and at what rate.
Mr. Vogeney continued by explaining the highlights of Options #2 through #4. With Option 94,
property owners could determine that they were being overcharged.
Councilor Woodrow said she would suggest adopting Option 43 for the current situation and have
staff bring back Option #2 to look at for future scenarios.
Councilor Ralston said he supported Option #3 which was specific for this project. We wanted to be
fair and this was fair.
Councilor Moore said she agreed a modified fee was appropriate for this situation. She asked if it
would be less expensive for them to connect while the line was being installed. To encourage
annexation, perhaps we could provide a 12 or 18 month time frame where they could connect at a
lower amount.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 3, 2014
Page 3
Mr. Vogeney said staff could bring back some options for a lower rate as part of the incentive. If the
Council wanted to do that, he would suggest a longer time frame than 18 months, such as five years
because the annexation process, which would be required, was lengthy and expensive.
Councilor Moore said she agreed to coming back later to amend the Code for future issues. She asked
if Franklin Boulevard had already been covered by this type of situation.
Mr. Vogeney said Franklin Boulevard was configured more normally and would fit better with the
usual formula.
Councilor Moore asked if there would be more cost for Franklin Boulevard property owners to
connect.
Mr. Vogeney said the properties along Franklin Boulevard wouldn't have the sewer in lieu of
assessment, but had an obligation to construct additional public pipe to connect. Some along McVay
Highway may need to construct additional public pipe, but most did not.
Councilor Moore said she was concerned that they were treating Glenwood property owners fairly.
Councilor Ralston referred to the time line mentioned by Councilor Moore and said there was no way
to predict a time limit that would make sense. Just coming up with a more fair method was the way to
go. A time frame could complicate things.
Councilor Brew said in the meantime Springfield ratepayers were fronting that money, and some
property owners may never annex. They only paid if they connected.
Mr. Vogeney said the fee was in the Master Fee Schedule that would be presented later in the work
session, with the cost of living adjustments (COLA) included. The fee formula was based on square
footage not taking into account the land use. It was based on providing local sewers to residential
properties so didn't work well with larger parcels.
Councilor Brew said there wasn't really a fair way to do this, but he was fine with Option #3 as
presented. He could see Councilor Moore's point on discounts as an incentive and also the other side
of the City funding. He also agreed with bringing back Option 92.
Councilor Ralston asked how 8" pipe worked for some parcels like the mobile home park where there
were a number of units.
Mr. Vogeney said the 8" pipe was the obligation to individual properties. An 8" pipe could easily
serve 100 houses.
Mayor Lundberg agreed with Option # 3 for this project and to look at Option 92 for future
circumstances. There would be people that would come forward to offer other suggestions for future
cases.
Mr. Vogeney said staff would work on rates to bring back in the future
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 3, 2014
Page 4
2. Master Fees and Charges Schedule.
Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. Each year, Council and staff
reviewed existing fees and charges for appropriateness of rates for meeting cost recovery targets as
well as reviewing for areas where new or additional fees should be considered. The last significant
review along with the re- formatting of the master fee schedule was completed in the spring of 2013
with minor adjustment in fall of 2013. This spring of 2014 review would focus on updates for annual
impacts of inflation, new fees and omissions as directed by Council.
Mr. Duey discussed the need for fees and charges in order to provide the services for the City due to
the fact that property.taxes didn't cover all services. The plan was to come back with a public hearing
near the first of March. Some fees could be brought to Council in a resolution, others must be
changed through an Ordinance, and building fees had to go to the State for approval before Council
approved.
Mr. Duey reviewed Section I which had only seven changes; two minor language changes and five
increases for certain business licenses in an amount greater than the consumer price index (CPI). He
explained why those five were being increased more than the CPI. The rest of the increases were based
on the CPI.
Councilor Moore said there was a statement at the beginning of the document that the City Manager
could waive the fee or allow a variance. She asked if that was on the website.
Mr. Duey said it was page one and was posted on the website. He referred to Section 2 — Fire and Life
Safety. He discussed the changes. Ambulance fees had not been increased since 2009 and Fire Med
since 2010. Eugene was looking at the same fee increases in order to keep them consistent, although
they had the ability to change their fees administratively.
Councilor Woodrow asked about reimbursement for ambulance services.
Mr. Duey said they would bill out the new fee, but Medicare and Medicaid would only cover a set
amount. This increase would only apply to those without insurance or not covered by Medicaid.
Councilor Brew asked about the benefit of waiting 3 -5 years for the increase in ambulance fees.
Mr. Duey said he was not sure.
Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery said the last time we had a fee increase for ambulances it was a
fairly, substantial increase and had been a while. At that time, the fee was at the top of the market so
they chose not to increase that fee for the last several years until it met market level.
Councilor Brew said this Council would prefer to see small increases more regularly.
Mr. Grimaldi said staff could bring it back every year with a potential CPI.
Council concurred with that approach..
Mr. Duey said it was sometimes more difficult to make annual changes on some of the small fees, so
they may skip over those on occasion.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 3, 2014
Page 5
Councilor Ralston said for the most part the increases were minimal and followed the CPI. It was fine
to update each year, but it was also a lot of work for staff.
Mr. Duey said it may take several cycles before they got all of the fee changes to line up in terms of
timing.
Mayor Lundberg asked if they would be kept up to date on which fees worked well.
Mr. Duey said they would. There were only minor language changes in Section 3 (Library). Section 4
(Municipal Court) had three fees — Conviction Fee; Court Appointed Attorney Fee; and Payment
Agreement Fee — that had been tried on a sliding scale for several years. Administratively, the sliding
scale didn't work well so staff was recommending putting those three fees back to a flat fee. That
made it easier to explain and there was less chance of error. The flat fee was set at the level that most
people were already paying.
Councilor Woodrow said it came out as an average of the three fees.
Mr. Duey said that was correct. He discussed the Court Appointed Attorney fee. Many people that
chose a Court Appointed Attorney were not charged because of their income level. This fee was for
those that chose a Court Appointed Attorney and had resources to pay. It would not apply to indigent
clients. He discussed the DUII fee, which followed State statute. The phone notification fee was new
because of the new software system for calls. He explained that this was for people that missed their
court dates and had a history of missing court dates.
Councilor Moore asked if they could be charged up to 10 calls. She asked how often they called.
Mr. Duey said the first time they would only get one call, but that number could increase if they
continued not to show. They were trying to find a way to remind them to come in for their Court date.
Mayor Lundberg asked if the diversion fee stayed with the City.
Mr. Duey said it all went to the State.
Mr. Duey said Section 5 (Police) had two changes in the dog and pig licenses. The changes matched
the fee to Eugene and Lane County to help generate some additional funds for the program.
Councilor Woodrow asked if there was a compelling reason to match Eugene and Lane County.
Mr. Duey said they felt it made sense and would help to generate funds for the program, which was
heavily subsidized.
Councilor Woodrow understood the need for the increase, but felt it was too much. She noted that the
department was much more efficient than in years past. She had an issue of raising the fee for the
senior citizen's unaltered dog license and would prefer it was just raised to $25. She also felt the
commercial kennel fee went too high. She couldn't find the definition of commercial kennel or watch
dog. She asked if those warranted such a large increase.
Mr. Duey said he would get those definitions from Police
Mr. Grimaldi asked if she wanted those fees lowered.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 3, 2014
Page 6
Councilor Brew said he didn't have a compelling reason not to have the unaltered dog license fee for a
senior as high as the unaltered dog license for other people because the same problems existed.
Councilor Moore said if they kept the fee for unaltered dogs the same for all people, there was no need
to have them separated. Only those with an altered dog would get a break.
Mr. Duey asked if they wanted to talk about this topic further in another work session.
Mayor Lundberg said that would be a good idea, as well as information and definitions for commercial
kennels and watch dogs. They also needed to talk about why this program was so subsidized.
Councilor Brew asked if they could also look at what it would cost if we got out of the business and
had Lane County take over.
Mr. Duey said there were no suggested changes in Section 6 (Building Safety Fees) other than CPI
increases and some language cleanup. Those fees needed to go to the State for review before Council
could approve. There was only one change in Section 7 (Engineering) which was the Over the Street
Banner fee. This had been discussed with Council on several occasions. Currently, based on Council
direction from last Fall, staff came up with a $150 fee to cover most of the cost of staff time and labor
to put them up and take them down. Current costs to the City were $170 per banner.
Councilor Woodrow said she didn't want to discourage someone from promoting their event or
program because of the high fee. Those banners were positive for the community and gave groups an
opportunity for people to see what was going to happen in Springfield. The banners were already
expensive. She suggested a charge of $75. She asked how many of these banners they had per year.
Development and Public Works Director Len Goodwin said about 18 per year.
Council Moore said she only saw them on Mohawk. It was noted that they were also put up on Main
Street. She said the City Manager did have the discretion to lower the cost. She asked if they were for
non -profit or for -profit agencies. All were for non- profit. She would also like to see the fee lowered a
bit.
Councilor Brew said he would rather raise the fee and regularly reduce it, because there were costs.
They should have some amount listed.
Councilor Ralston said it involved City equipment and manpower so there was a cost. He suggested a
fee of $100.
Councilor Woodrow said there were a lot of people that would see the high fee, but would not ask to
have it waived.
Mayor Lundberg said the banners cost money and the City should try to recover part of the time and
materials.
Councilor Brew asked if the funds for this went into the General Fund or Street Fund since the work
being done was likely paid for through the Street Fund. General Fund.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
February 3, 2014
Page 7
Mr. Duey said under Section 8 (Planning Services), there was a new fee from Willamette Greenway,
to match the other two existing greenway fees. Staff would bring those items back for discussion next
week during the work session, and then move forward with the adoption process.
Councilor Woodrow asked when the Thurston High School pedestrian crossing would be started.
Mr. Goodwin said it would be started in the Spring.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:58 p.m.
Minutes Recorder — Amy Sowa
.7
Christine L. Lundbe
Mayor
Attest:
Amy Sow
City Recorder