HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/26/2015 Work SessionCity of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
TUESDAY MAY 26, 2015
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday May 26, 2015 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Ralston, Woodrow and Pishioneri.
Also present were Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith,
Administrative Assistant AJ Ripka and members of the staff.
Councilor Moore was absent (excused).
1. Fire Special Operating Levy Renewal.
Bob Duey, Finance Director, presented the staff report on this item.
The current Fire Special Operating Levy passed by voters in November of 2010 provides for the
staffing of an engine crew at Springfield's Station #3 and will expire on June 30, 2016. After
discussion in work session on May I Vh, Council directed staff to prepare a ballot title and explanation
that provided options for considering a renewal rate that ranges from the current rate of $0.36 per
thousand to a new rate of $0.40 per thousand. Included with these options should be summary of the
fiscal or potential service impacts of the renewal of the levy at a rate that is less than the amount
required to fully finance for the entire five year levy period a three person engine crew at Station # 3.
A recommended rate by the Council is necessary for the preparation of the ballot title and explanation.
Mr. Duey noted that the ballot title would be similar to the ballot title for the previous levies, but a
sentence may need to be added if they choose an amount less than .44/$1000 to acknowledge that the
levy would not fully fund the station. After this evening's discussion, a public hearing will be held on
June 15, 2015 to review and consider adoption of a resolution and ballot title. Following adoption of
the ballot title, the City Recorder would publish it in the paper for citizen review and possible appeal.
At the end of the appeal period, the ballot title will be filed with the County Elections Officer, 61 days
prior to the election or September 3, 2015.
Mr. Duey said the levy has always been for full staffing of Fire Station #3. The first levy was at
.36/$1000, the first renewal was at .40/$1000, and the second renewal was at .36/$1000. This last
amount has not generated the necessary funding, and funds have been withdrawn from the reserve and
are nearly depleted.
Mr. Duey said this is a highly valued service by the Council and the community at this Fire Station.
Reduction of service does not seem to be a consideration at this time, but would be addressed in
another way with other funding. The levy has been successful in the past, passing by a wide margin.
At the last work session, the new rate would be .44/$1000 in order to fully fund the station over the
five year period. That would be an .08 increase over the last levy. There was also discussion at the last
work session about compression. Both the Fire Levy and Police Levy lost about 4 '/2 % of its funding
due to compression last year. If they were to increase the levy, it would likely increase the
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 2
compression factor for the City and other jurisdictions with levies. They won't know the real impact
until the real market value comes out from the County. It could improve based on growth.
Approximately .04/$1000 would equal one firefighter/paramedic, so a reduction in that amount would
mean that a firefighter paramedic could be moved off of the levy fund and into the General Fund.
Lowering the levy to .36/$1000 would mean moving two firefighters/paramedics to the General Fund.
Each position would be about a $150,000 increase to the General Fund annually. If that were to occur,
discussions would need to be held during the budget season about service levels citywide to absorb
that cost. If the levy amount is less than .44/$1000, the ballot title should include a sentence explaining
that the funds from the levy may not cover funding for a full station.
Councilor Pishioneri said he is not in support of increasing taxes so prefers the .36/$1000 which would
not be an increase. He doesn't like the thought of reducing services, but would like to move towards
not having to rely on the levies. This is a great opportunity to look at our General Fund and make
decisions about how to fund the firefighters. They may also need to look at how to reduce resources
during low call -for -service times.
Councilor Woodrow said she is open to setting the amount at .40/$1000 and moving the $150,000 to
the General Fund. She would like to start the process of getting the City away from the levy if possible
and this could be a good first step. She is not opposed to going with .36/$1000.
Councilor Ralston said he wants to move away from the levy and this is a great opportunity to start on
that path. He would like to keep the amount at.36/$1000 and move two positions to the General Fund
if possible. He could also support .40/$1000 and moving one position to the General Fund if that was
the choice of the Council.
Councilor VanGordon said he originally was in favor of .36/$1000, but in looking at the annual
deficits, he feels that is too much to tackle at once. He would like to start at .40/$1000, moving one
position to the General Fund, and committing themselves to tackle another position next time the levy
comes up for renewal.
Councilor Wylie said she agrees that they should start at .40/$1000 and take the movement of
positions to the General Fund in increments. She likes the idea of reducing the levy and moving the
positions to the General Fund. During budget time, they need to look at a line item that identifies
reducing levies. The City funds other positions and projects, and those funds could be used to fund the
levy positions.
Councilor Pishioneri said his other concern is compression with both the fire and police levies.
Councilor Ralston asked if the 4 '/2% loss due to compression last year was Police and Fire together.
Mr. Duey said both lost 4 t/2%. For the fire levy, that amounted to about $68,000.
Councilor Ralston asked if the reduction in the levy would reduce the effect on compression.
Mr. Duey said there were a number of factors that would affect compression, including real market
value. If the economy does well, the effect would lessen.
Councilor Ralston said they will be revisiting this each year during the budget process, and looking at
adding firefighters into the General Fund. He would be inclined to go with the .36/$1000 and plan on
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 3
doing something in the future to keep the rates down. He asked if changes could be made during the
levy period.
Mr. Duey said they could change the levy every year, as long as they didn't go higher. If they had a
.40/$1000 levy, they have a choice every year during the Council process to levy the full amount or
partial amount.
Mayor Lundberg asked what would happen if the levy did not pass. The fire departments have merged,
yet the funding piece is still separated. If the levy fails, it will affect Eugene as well. The same would
be true if Eugene didn't have adequate funding one year.
Chief Groves said if they don't have the resources to pay for five stations, they will lose one. It would
be the same on the Eugene side if they didn't have adequate funding. In service deployment, they
work in a fluid station, backfilling gaps and responding as they can. Between the two cities, it is a very
free flowing of the units back and forth to deploy the right number of resources to answer a call.
Mayor Lundberg she asked how it would affect the system if they chose .36/$1000, but moved only
one firefighter/paramedic to the General Fund.
Chief Groves said they currently have a minimum staffing level of three people per company, which is
in line with the National Standard and average for our size of jurisdiction. If they closed a whole
company or closed a station, that threatens our insurance rating which effects fire insurance. Risk to
the community would also increase. They will adjust to whatever they need to give the best
deployment they can.
Mr. Duey said if they chose .36/$1000, he would not recommend eliminating two positions the first
year, but rather start with one and gradually move up to three positions off the levy. There are different
strategies depending on the figure Council chooses.
Councilor VanGordon said it makes sense to him to have the same strategy conversation whether they
choose .36/$1000 or .40/$1000. He prefers .40/$1000 because it offers more flexibility up front. They
can levy less during the levy period.
Mayor Lundberg asked for Council's position on the two rates.
Council discussed why they wanted each rate and the risk of raising the rate and losing the election.
The difference in the yes votes for the .36/$1000 and the .40/$1000 was discussed.
Mr. Towery said there are a lot of factors that go into the voter's decisions at each election. He pointed
out that there was also a 10% difference for the two levies that were both at .36/$1000. It is difficult to
forecast trends.
Councilor Ralston noted that the first .36/$1000 was for the initial levy, which would make it harder to
pass. Once the levy was in place, voters were more in favor of continuing the service.
Councilor Pishioneri said he was looking at the how much they would be taxing the citizens. He felt it
was their responsibility to look out for the best interests of the citizens in terms of what they are
paying and their safety.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 4
Mayor Lundberg said it is $300,000 that they will have to address. They also have the Police Levy
coming up next year, which is a much larger amount. She noted that it was now one department with
Eugene and Springfield so there may be some confusion to the citizens. They need to make sure they
have the best chance for the levy to pass.
Councilor VanGordon said he could support .36/$1000.
2. Main Street Corridor Vision Plan Implementation Priorities.
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner, presented the staff report on this item.
Council is asked to prioritize short term (2015-2020) and long term (2020-2035) strategies and actions
to revitalize and improve Springfield's Main Street Corridor between Downtown and Thurston.
Extensive public input received through the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan land use and
transportation visioning process has confirmed the importance of and community support for
implementing measures to improve safety, livability, appearance and economic vitality in the corridor.
The adopted Vision Plan identifies short and long term actions and partnerships the City could initiate
to implement the vision. Recommended actions range from land use policy/zoning updates to the
design and construction of physical changes to or within the public right of way. The Plan also
identifies potential programs to support and incentivize business development and job creation in the
corridor.
The Main Street Corridor Vision Plan (adopted by Council on February 17, 2015) identifies a new
broad, achievable vision: the transition of Main Street to a "complete community street" that will
provide enhanced opportunities for successful commerce and corridor redevelopment as Springfield
grows. The Plan identifies specific vision statements, goals, activity nodes, redevelopment
opportunity sites, and potential implementation strategies for three distinct "segments" along 7 miles
of Main Street between Downtown and Thurston, based on what we've heard through the visioning
process, and in response to existing and expected future conditions in the corridor.
On March 9, Council conducted a Work Session focused on "Main Street Corridor Vision Plan and
Traffic Safety", and directed DPW and PD staff to pursue a set of short and long term actions and
collaborations with ODOT to address immediate traffic safety concerns in the corridor. Council will
note that many of the Implementation Strategies identified in the Vision Plan dovetail with actions to
address traffic safety concerns — including but not limited to installation of street illumination,
revisiting the Main Street Safety Study, installing Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PUB) east of Hwy
126/Bob Straub Parkway in the higher speed area – ODOT, and redesign of Main Street consistent
with the Main Street Corridor Vision Plan and other relevant resources. Other strategies dovetail with
multimodal mobility improvements identified in the Main -McVay Transit Study.
Ms. Pauly displayed a map showing the study area. Staff is looking for direction from Council about
what they want staff to work on over the next several years that is related to Main Street. They are
already doing the transit study, and gathering more information on traffic safety. Last year, Council
had talked about improving pedestrian crossings and connectivity, updating land uses and zoning,
designing and constructing parallel bike routes to Main Street (funding from ODOT is available),
initiating implementation of the Wayfinding Plan, initiating a Springfield Public Art Program,
initiating an expanded Fagade Improvement Program, and identifying and implementing options to
reduce traffic speed, which is currently being studied by ODOT. She asked if those were still things of
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 5
interest to the Council. She referred to the list of projects in the Council Briefing Memorandum and
explained how she organized those items.
Staff recommends that Council go forward with the transit study, which they have already decided to
do, and to direct staff to look for as many opportunities as possible through that coordinating with
planning work to make sure they get the best possible outcomes that relate to the broader vision for
Main Street. The second thing they recommend is for Council to consider initiating the update of the
plan and zoning. Staff feels they have a chance to get another grant from ODOT Transportation and
Growth Management (TGM) grant for a consultant to do that work with the City. This is a very
opportune time to do this work. Staff has met with a number of property owners who are very
interested in that as they look ahead to redeveloping their property. The third thing is to coordinate
any public realm enhancements in terms of transit stations and planning for the future, and potential
incentives for transit -supportive development working with property owners that have interest. These
three things could likely be done within our budget and timeframes.
Councilor Pishioneri said he is a proponent with moving forward and facilitating discussions between
the property owners and the City. Development will help benefit the community as a whole. If the City
can be a catalyst in helping to get development and redevelopment going, it is a win-win. It can also
help to gain the trust of the business community along Main Street. He referred to the business owner
who spoke last week and said he had not been contacted about the transit study. The City shouldn't
depend on Lane Transit District (LTD) to do that, although he hopes they do, but the City can also
partner with them in that outreach.
Ms. Pauly said she got the contact information for that business owner and would be contacting him.
Councilor Ralston asked about parallel bike routes.
Ms. Pauly said the idea is to get bicyclists off the street into a safer environment, such as some of the
side streets that run parallel to Main Street.
Community Development Manager for Transportation, Tom Boyatt responded. He said there are a
number of people who are not comfortable biking on the busy arterial. The City is always looking for
a connected street system that doesn't depend on the arterials, giving people a safer place to bike and
get to their destination. There aren't a lot of options east/west and Daisy is a good option.
Councilor Ralston said he knows there aren't many parallel streets. Putting bike paths on those streets
would affect the residents' ability to park. He wants to keep the street widths the same, and not narrow
them to allow for bike lanes.
Mr. Boyatt said they would be sharing the local street, not adding another lane.
Mayor Lundberg said she is fine with the three items presented. They need to be very conscious of the
process moving forward with LTD. She likes the idea of getting another TGM grant to assist in fixing
the patchwork of zoning so it makes more sense and encourages development that limits the amount of
pedestrian crossing needed on Main Street. She hopes they shorten the area between 10`x' and 42nd
Street into smaller segments so they create a sense of a neighborhood. She would like to have the
lights on 54d' Street changed from a cable to a pole so they are more visible. That is priority to her.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 6
Councilor Wylie said a lot of the problems on the West 11th EmX project came from misinformation
and misunderstanding over and over again. They need to have a clear message in many formats to the
community as they move forward in working with LTD.
Councilor VanGordon agreed with all of the proposed projects. The zoning has a lot of value and he is
very interested in that piece. As they move forward, they need to be able to show the public what the
public outreach has looked like, and who they have contacted and met.
Mayor Lundberg said another piece of the communication is the wording used. The consultants that
did the outreach for the transit study did not use the term EmX which would have been something the
businesses would have remembered. Miscommunication occurs in these situations. The message needs
to be clear and in everyday language. They not only need to reach out to a large number of people, but
they need to make sure those people understood the discussion.
Councilor Wylie said during the EmX Steering Committee several years ago, a business owner came
in with concerns because he had not been given accurate and clear information.
Councilor Ralston referred to a statement about `attractive sidewalk corridor'. He asked what section
they are talking about. That could be very expensive to the property owners.
Ms. Pauly said the sidewalks are already in place, but there are parts with holes and other things that
impede walkability. Improvements could be made as new developments are built, or through larger
projects over time. They had some discussion about the City adding a decorative light fixture at some
of the intersections. Small things could add up over time.
Councilor Ralston said he wanted to make sure they kept the costs down for the property owners.
Mayor Lundberg said it was one of the business developers that brought it to the City's attention to
make the intersection at 21't and Main Street more attractive.
3. Downtown District Design Standards Project Update and Consultant Scope of Work.
Linda Pauly, Principal Planner, presented the staff report on this item.
This is the second phase of a public planning process that will produce a set of coherent and consistent
design standards to improve Downtown's overall image, attractiveness and economic vitality. Council
has directed staff to prepare Downtown District Design Standards to ensure that development projects,
new uses and new public improvements will make positive contributions to improve the look, feel and
functionality of Downtown.
At two previous work sessions (May 12 and June 23, 2014) Council reviewed the overall scope of
work for a project that will amend the Downtown Refinement Plan and update all of the design
standards applicable in the Downtown District. Council provided early input and direction to staff on
Phase One: Building Fagade and Property Maintenance Standards.
Subsequently, staff applied for and was successful in receiving a Code Assistance grant from the
State's Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) program to provide consultant resources to
complete Phase Two of the project. A consultant has been selected and will begin work this month.
The consultant is tasked with preparing new form -based design standards that will be applicable to
new Downtown development and public improvements in the right-of-way. Careful consideration of
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 7
the interface between Downtown development and the adjacent residential neighborhoods including
the Washburne Historic District and East Kelly Butte is an important aspect of the design standards to
be addressed.
Ms. Pauly noted on a map the lands in the Downtown Refinement Plan. This is the area that would
have Downtown Design Standards apply. She included excerpts from the scope of work in the agenda
packet for Council reference. The consultant will work with the City project team, the Downtown
Citizen Advisory Committee, and a Technical Advisory group to propose a set of coherent and
consistent design standards to improve Downtown's image, attractiveness and economic vitality. A
series of work sessions with the Planning Commission and Council will be scheduled in the months
ahead to review and provide input on the Phase Two draft design standards and code amendments and
a coordinated strategy to implement the Phase One Building Fagade and Property Maintenance
Standards. Public involvement activities will be conducted to highlight the importance of good design
and property maintenance standards and to solicit input on the proposals.
These actions support the outcomes envisioned in the Council's adopted Downtown Urban Design
Plan and Implementation Strategy consistent with Council Goals.
The goal would be to have adoption and ready products back to the Council before the 2016 summer
recess.
Councilor Ralston asked what the current standard was for building heights.
Ms. Pauly said the most recent building that went in under current standards in Downtown was the
Royal Building. It would be up to the Council to decide if the new standard would be less or more than
current standards. They may also divide downtown into several subareas with separate height
standards.
Mayor Lundberg said the things listed will be included in the process and what will be discussed
Ms. Pauly said staff would bring current standards and proposals each step of the way. She has a work
session scheduled for the July 13 for staff to bring the first round of standards for their review. The
Downtown Advisory Committee has been in place since 2008. Some served on the original Urban
Renewal Advisory Committee so have continuity about their knowledge and understanding.
Councilor Pishioneri said through this plan he wants to make sure they don't lose some of the historic
buildings that are Downtown. He doesn't want to lose the historic feel of our Main Street and the
Washburne and adjoining neighborhood.
Ms. Pauly said part of the scope of work includes determining the interface between the
neighborhoods and Downtown. There may need to be special standards in some of those areas.
Councilor Pishioneri said he thinks some of the historic look was lost with the construction of the
Royal Building. He doesn't want too much of a modern look in new development Downtown.
Mayor Lundberg said cohesiveness may be a theme they would like to see between the neighborhoods,
especially the Washburne who considers downtown as part of their neighborhood.
Ms. Pauly said they have a member on the DAC who is a resident and representative of the
Washbume neighborhood.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 8
4. Building Safety Fee Review.
Matthew Ruettgers, Building and Land Development Manager presented the staff report on this item.
Springfield's Building Safety program is facing a number of challenges including increasing demand
for customer service and financial stability of the program.
The State of Oregon has delegated the authority to provide a full service building program to the City
of Springfield. One of the requirements of this delegated authority is that the City provides adequate
funds, equipment and resources necessary to administer and enforce the program. In support of this
mandate, state statute specifies that all revenues collected for building activity, i.e. plan review,
inspections, be spent only on functions and services that directly support the building safety program.
Springfield has enjoyed a healthy level of building activity and associated revenues due to a large
amount of high value construction in the community. Historically, the permit fee revenue generated
by these projects resulted in a fairly stable Building Fund reserve even though the City's fees are
among the lowest of comparable jurisdictions. Past practice for managing the Building Fund has been
to preserve these surpluses during times of high activity to supplement the fund during periods of low
activity. Since the downturn in the economy in 2009 program expenditures have exceeded revenues
each of these 6 years; as a result, the fund reserves are nearly completely depleted and program staff
has been reduced from 15.56 FTE to 5.85 FTE. This current 5.85 FTE represent the minimum level
of staff needed to maintain the authority delegated by the State to operate the program.
Staff analyzed the Revenues, Expenses and Reserves to determine the potential impact a building
permit fee increase would have on these items given the current and projected development activity.
Fee options are presented at 6%, 8%, 10% and 12%, respectively, on several different types of
projects. As part of this analysis, staff also met with the Home Builders Association of Lane County,
who indicated they would be agreeable to a 6% fee increase.
Councilor Pishioneri said the cost for the program is listed at $985,000, which would come to
$168,400 per person at 5.85 FTE. He knows they are not paid that much so asked where the rest of the
funds were going.
Mr. Ruettgers said the program also has to pay into the internal charges for the City.
Senior Management Analyst Rhonda Rice said it was about 30% -33% for all internal charges,
including insurance.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if that cost was included in the cost of wages and benefits.
Ms. Rice said that amount was separate from the staff s wages and benefits. The internal charges come
from the materials and services budget item.
Councilor Pishioneri said it seems strange that the HBA would agree to a 6% increase.
Mr. Ruettgers noted that during the Master Fee Schedule increases of 2% CPI in May 2015, the
building fees were not increased. The 6% increase is actually a 4% increase plus the 2% that was
applied to all other fees in May.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 9
Councilor Pishioneri asked if Willamalane had permit fees, or if they are all done through the City.
Mr. Ruettgers said the comparisons in Attachment 3 of the agenda packet are only representative of
the building permit fees, and does not include the 12% state surcharge which every jurisdiction has.
The system development charges (SDC) are not included in the comparison; only the building permit
fees.
Councilor VanGordon said he was trying to match up the revenue shown on the chart and in the
agenda item summary (AIS).
Mr. Ruettgers said the chart shows the estimated actuals, and the figures in the AIS are based on his
actual data. The chart is older than the data.
Councilor VanGordon asked if they were still scheduled to add .75 FTE.
Mr. Ruettgers said there was a request as part of the recent budget cycle to add additional FTE.
Councilor VanGordon asked if the adjustment to the fund was driven by the addition of the FTE due to
a higher volume of work.
Development and Public Works Director Anette Spickard said the portion put into the Building Fund
relates to Code Enforcement staff that can no longer be paid for with the Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds so had to be put back into
their department budget. Code Enforcement staff enforces in part building violations. The funds are
not to add Building Inspectors, but to resolve the funding issue.
Councilor VanGordon asked if they are asking the HBA to pay for that increase.
Mr. Ruettgers said a considerable portion of what Code Enforcement does is related to the Building
Code. They do investigations on buildings without permits which ties it back to the Building
Department. If it is determined no building permits were in place, it goes to Building staff.
Councilor VanGordon asked if the City was passing on those costs to the users. He asked if the
Building fund would be stable if it were just funding the 5.85 FTE, or if the increase is to help pay for
the additional Code Enforcement costs.
Mr. Ruettgers said it is not. The transferring of FTE to the appropriate fund, is not affecting the bigger
issue of needing to build up a stable reserve and stable program that is sustainable. They are adding to
the program.
Councilor VanGordon asked if the annual costs have increased.
Mr. Ruettgers said our insurance charges and other costs have increased.
Councilor VanGordon said he is comfortable with the 6% increase. It is more important that we
control this process rather than send it back to the State.
Mr. Ruettgers said the last significant increase was in 2013.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 10
Councilor VanGordon said this is important for the development community. He would like to have
staff meet with the developers to get this back to a sustainable place which may include making it
more consistent with CPI, so they are more consistent.
Mr. Ruettgers said the City of Eugene recently decided to go to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rather
than the Construction Index, which is actually less than the Construction index.
Councilor Ralston said he is comfortable with the 6% increase. He wants to control costs as much as
possible. None of the City's programs have 100% cost recovery so he's not interested in getting it to a
sustainable level, as long as it is somewhat sustainable. He is not interested in increasing the FTE.
Councilor Pishioneri said he is still stuck on the Code Enforcement piece. Historically, they are
responding to many other enforcements issues.
Ms. Spickard noted that they are not fully funded through the Building fund.
Councilor Pishioneri asked for clarification and said it would then appear that about 25% of their calls
relate to Building Code. He does not support having the builders underwriting staff for code violations
that are not directly related to the industry. He doesn't think we should expect the program to be fully
sustainable. The increases over the last few years add up to a lot for builders. He asked about the
actual costs for permits.
Mr. Ruettgers said figures for a single family dwelling were noted on page 5 of Attachment 3 of the
agenda packet.
Councilor Pishioneri said he can't support anything more than 6%.
Mayor Lundberg said she would not support anything over 6%. She referred to the CDBG funding and
the changes that have occurred. She asked why there was not a reduction in administrative costs in the
current CDBG process if Code Enforcement costs were removed. Although these are only the building
fees, it is important to remember that we do have a second taxing entity (Willamalane) that charges a
separate SDC charge which adds to the building costs.
Mr. Ruettgers said permit fees for the average single family home in Springfield with SDCs is in the
$14,000 to $15,000 range, with about $3 800 of that as Willamalane SDCs.
Mayor Lundberg said it is something they must keep in mind when looking at the fees.
Councilor Pishioneri said when adding both the City and Willamalane SDCs together, Springfield may
be one of the highest in the state.
Mr. Ruettgers said there was a study through Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) regarding SDCs
and building permit charges. Springfield was not in that study, but it did include Eugene and Lane
County. He said he could send it to the Council. If Council is supportive of the 6% increase, he will
skip the second work session and bring it to the Council for adoption on July 20.
Mayor Lundberg said an additional work session was not needed and they could just bring it to the
Council during the July 20 regular meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 26, 2015
Page 11
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Minutes Recorder — Amy Sowa
Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor
Attestsn _
l.�iYi
Amy Sow
City Recorder