Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 03 Council MinutesAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 4/4/2016 Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Staff Contact/Dept.: Amy Sowa Staff Phone No: 541-726-3700 Estimated Time: Consent Calendar S P R I N G F I E L D C I T Y C O U N C I L Council Goals: Mandate ITEM TITLE: COUNCIL MINUTES ACTION REQUESTED: By motion, approval of the attached minutes. ISSUE STATEMENT: The attached minutes are submitted for Council approval. ATTACHMENTS: Minutes: a. February 16, 2016 – Regular Meeting b. February 22, 2016 – Work Session c. March 21, 2016 – Regular Meeting DISCUSSION/ FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. City of Springfield Regular Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD TUESDAY FEBRUARY 16, 2016 The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and Pishioneri. 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. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Lundberg. SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Claims a. Approval of the January 2016, Disbursements for Approval. 2. Minutes a. February 1, 2016 – Regular Meeting 3. Resolutions a. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-02 – A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT CITY PROJECT P31024; OSPREY PARK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PIP), RAINBOW BOULEVARD. 4. Ordinances a. ORDINANCE NO. 6344 – AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, AND WILLAMALANE PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT; AND WITHDRAWING THE SAME TERRITORY FROM THE WILLAKENZIE RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT. 5. Other Routine Matters a. Authorize City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a Contract with PacificSource Health Plans, in the Amount of $905,000 to Provide 2016 Third Party Administrative Services for City Self- funded Medical/Rx/Vision Insurance. b. Approval of Liquor License Application for Nails Now, Located at 3000 Gateway Street, Suite 804, Springfield, Oregon. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 16, 2016 Page 2 c. Approval of Liquor License Application for Hayden Bridge Tap House, Located at 1910 Marcola Road, Springfield, Oregon. d. Authorize City Manager to Sign a Contract Amendment with Life Flight Network, Inc. for Critical Care Ambulance Transports in ASA #5 Extending the Current Agreement for Three Months. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. ITEMS REMOVED PUBLIC HEARINGS - Please limit comments to 3 minutes. Request to speak cards are available at both entrances. Please present cards to City Recorder. Speakers may not yield their time to others. 1. Adoption of Amended Stormwater System Development Charge Project List. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-03 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD COUNCIL ADOPTING A REVISED LIST OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FUNDED BY STORMWATER SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES. Ken Vogeney, Emergency Management Manager, presented the staff report on this item. On April 19, 2010, the Council adopted Resolution No. 10-17, which adopted the City’s current Stormwater SDC Project List. At that time, the City had not identified the existing and potential stormwater public outfall locations to the Willamette River to support redevelopment of Glenwood. On September 8, 2015, Council adopted Ordinance No. 6341 amending the Metro Plan and PFSP to add three potential public stormwater outfall locations in Glenwood. Staff proposes that these three potential outfall projects be added to the Stormwater SDC Project List so that they will be eligible for Stormwater Improvement SDC funding when they are constructed. In addition to the three potential stormwater outfall projects, staff has identified three existing public stormwater outfalls that would likely need to be modified to support redevelopment in Glenwood. Staff recommends adding these three outfall improvement projects to the Stormwater SDC Project List as well. Adding these six projects does increase the maximum rate that the City could collect for Stormwater Improvement SDCs. The potential Stormwater Improvement SDC rate increase from adding these six projects to the Project List is $0.00646 per square foot of impervious surface when applying the current Stormwater SDC Methodology. For a typical single family lot with 2,700 square feet of impervious area, the additional Stormwater Improvement SDC would be $17.44. Staff recommends that the Stormwater Improvement SDC rate not be adjusted at this time to reflect the addition of these outfall projects. A notice concerning the proposed additions to the Project List and advising of the public hearing was mailed to all parties listed on the City’s SDC Interested Parties List on January 14, 2016. Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 16, 2016 Page 3 No one appeared to speak. Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WYLIE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2016-03. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE 1. Mark Cosby, Marcola, OR. Mr. Cosby said he was interested in the article in the Register Guard regarding panhandling. He referred to the Preamble of the Constitution and said he saw now difference between those filling the boot for charities and others getting money. If you are going to commit to prohibiting one, in all fairness it should apply to everyone. The Fire Department could go into a parking lot (for the Fill the Boot campaign). He is pro-officer and pro-fire department, but has seen an imbalance between the public and private sector. COUNCIL RESPONSE CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS 1. Correspondence from Springfield Public Schools Regarding the 2016 Springfield Cesar Chavez Celebration. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WYLIE TO ACCEPT THE CORRESPONDENCE FOR FILING. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. BIDS ORDINANCES BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL 1. Committee Appointments 2. Business from Council a. Committee Reports i. Councilor Moore said she attended the Blacks in Government dinner a week ago. Dr. Dexter Gordon was a great speaker and it was a very nice event. Councilor Pishioneri said he was pleased to be able to give the welcome for the dinner. ii. Councilor Wylie asked for a report on the United Front trip to Washington DC. Mayor Lundberg said the meeting with the NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) did not go well. They are proposing rules regarding steelhead and salmon City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 16, 2016 Page 4 which would severely impact Springfield and other communities near a river. A proposed development would have some level of uncertainty because the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) has not set the rules. They did not speak directly to them, but had the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) talk to them. The regional person said their goal is to restrict development. This is a big concern and they didn’t feel they had a good voice at that meeting. Our staff is working diligently on that issue as are other jurisdictions. Mayor Lundberg also reported that they have been working to get Glenwood called Springfield for the purpose of the post office and zip code. The postal service did offer an alternative to allow Glenwood residents to go by either Eugene or Springfield and to have one zip code of 97403. One issue is that if there is a street name in both Glenwood and Eugene it could be confusing. They postal service was more congenial, but made no promises. Mayor Lundberg said they met and talked about the Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership (IMCP) Program with both Federal and State representatives. She said Charlie Brash was very excited about the food sector and advanced wood products and talked about buildings with cross laminated timber (CLT). At this time, Riddle has the only mill in the country that produces CLT which means our region could be the premier CLT producer in the country or the world at large. They met with Senator Wyden and representatives from Oregon State University, University of Oregon, and Springfield Public Schools (Sue Rieke-Smith) about how we could use our forests in an environmental way and produce a product that could be shipped out of state. It was a very good meeting. iii. Councilor Pishioneri reported on the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) meeting. He said they were authorized to pay off revenue bonds early, causing a substantial debt reduction. They will also refinance at 2% for 10 years, rather than 20. Doing these things will bring down the reserves, but they will still remain healthy. The savings could result in keeping rates flat. Three new videos which targeted families and young people were developed regarding MWMC. The videos will be on all agency websites, and on air as a public service announcement (PSA). Shawn Krueger was hired as the pre-treatment supervisor. iv. Councilor Woodrow said she had the opportunity to attend the kick-off for the new building at the Child Center. They have been in existence since 1971 and are a vital resource in the community. They are expanding to help more families and children. They have a dedicated staff who are caring and concerned for everyone they work with. It is a regional resource. Councilor Wylie said she used to work with the Child Center when she was director of Willamette Family. They are a wonderful resource for parents with very challenging children and we are fortunate to have this resource available. b. Other Business BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes February 16, 2016 Page 5 BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned 7:17 p.m. Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ____________________ City Recorder City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY FEBRUARY 22, 2016 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday February 22, 2016 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and Pishioneri. 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. 1. Historic Commission Interviews. Mark McCaffery, Planner, presented the staff report on this item. There are four vacancies on the seven-member Historic Commission as a result of two term expirations and two resignations. After a 3-month recruitment period that closed on February 8, 2016, the Department received applications from Kristina Koenig and Mackenzie Karp. The vacancies on the Historic Commission are a result of term expirations for Commissioners Dannie Helm and Kuri Gill, and the resignation of Commissioners Vincent Martorello and Kerry Barbero. Qualifications for membership on the Historic Commission include expertise in the fields of architecture, history, architectural history, planning, or archeology; residency within the Metro Plan boundaries; or as residents, electors, or property owners within Springfield. In addition, the Council shall solicit recommendations for appointment from Willamalane and School District #19 (Municipal Code Section 2.502). The School District declined to recommend appointees to fill these vacancies; Willamalane recommended applicant Kristina Koenig to fill the vacancy created by Commissioner Martorello’s resignation. Ms. Koenig has a Master’s degree in Architecture and Community and Regional Planning, is a resident of Springfield and is employed by Willamalane. Ms. Karp has a Master’s degree in Architectural History, resides in Eugene and is employed by NEDCO in Downtown Springfield. State and Federal funding of the City’s historic preservation activities stipulate that a majority of the Commissioners have professional qualifications in a field related to historic preservation. Two current members and both applicants possess these qualifications and also meet or partially meet the qualifications and standards set forth by the National Park Service regarding commissions. Springfield Municipal Code Section 2.506 states that any vacancy shall be filled for the unexpired portion of the term of the member creating the vacancy, and Section 2.504 states that appointed members shall hold office for four years with the terms staggered to provide overlapping and continuity. The candidate appointed for a first term is eligible to serve for four years beginning on the date of appointment by City Council, currently scheduled for March 7, 2016. The candidate appointed to fill Commissioner Martorello’s vacancy is eligible to serve the remaining portion of this term, which expires on February 2, 2018. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 22, 2016 Page 2 Mr. McAffery introduced himself to the Council and said he was the new staff liaison to the Historic Commission. Councilor Ralston asked if the City was still continuing to recruit since only two applicants had applied for four positions. Mr. McCaffery said they would re-open the process once this process was complete. The Council introduced themselves and interviewed the applicants: Kristina Koenig and Mackenzie Karp. 1. Describe your professional and personal experience as it relates to your desire to become a Historic Commissioner. (Councilor Wylie) 2. What is it about Springfield’s history that interests you most? (Councilor Ralston) 3. Have you attended a Historic Commission meeting? If so, what were your impressions? (Councilor Pishioneri) 4. Why are you interested in serving on the Historic Commission? (Councilor Woodrow) 5. Describe your familiarity with the City’s historic resources. (Councilor VanGordon) 6. What initiatives are you interested in working on if you are appointed as a Commissioner? (Councilor Moore) Ms. Koenig asked the Council what they want to see and receive from the Historic Commission members. Ms. Karp asked what the Council had as a general vision for the Historic Commission. Council responded to their questions. The Council discussed the qualifications of the applicants and decided to appoint both applicants. 2. Proposed Format and Process for City Manager Evaluation. Greta Utecht, Human Resources Director, presented the staff report on this item. The City Manager’s evaluation is due and staff proposes that the new form be used by Council and the Mayor this year. It does not require raters to write long narrative review statements, but provides for individual comments should the rater wish to provide them. It attempts to address most, if not all, dimensions of a City Manager’s responsibilities. However, there are additional spaces on the form in order that Council might add any additional indicators they believe are missing. After review and discussion of the form itself, and assuming Council is supportive of its use, staff will finalize it and redistribute it to Council and Mayor, who will have 2 weeks to complete it. Upon receiving all completed evaluation forms from Council, the Human Resources director will tabulate the scores and summarize all comments on one master document. In the meantime, the City Manager will complete his own self-evaluation, using the form and providing a narrative statement in response to Question 1 on page 6 of the form. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 22, 2016 Page 3 In an executive session on April 18, the City Council and Mayor will discuss the City Manager’s performance. On that same evening in regular session, the Human Resources manager will present information regarding city manager compensation to the Mayor and Council for their deliberation. Councilor Woodrow asked where they might be able to add future goals or expectations. Ms. Utecht noted there was a place on the last page. She will reformat it so it is clear which part is for the Council to fill out and which part is for the City manager to fill out. Councilor Woodrow said sometimes the goals and expectations come out of the full environment of the CMO and another staff member. She asked if there was a place to identify that. Ms. Utecht said there is a section on the last page under “City Manager’s Self-Evaluation” for the Council to fill out. She will reformat this page so questions #2 and #3 are at the end of the Mayor and Council portion of the evaluation, and #1 thru #5 are at the end of the City Manager’s self-evaluation. Councilor Woodrow said there are times when their goal for the City Manager also involves the City Manager’s Office (CMO) and other staff. She asked if there was a place to incorporate that piece. Ms. Utecht said Question #4 under Element D asks if the CMO is effective and meeting the community needs. She said they could add another element or another question in that section. If the departments aren’t responding it reflects on the City Manager. Element D would be their opportunity to include additional comments about how the CMO or other departments, in general work together to meet the goals established. Councilor Ralston said he liked the format and felt it covered all of the areas. If the Council has a particular goal, they could write them in the blank spaces in Section A. Ms. Utecht said that was a great idea Councilor Pishioneri asked if the ratings were looked at individually or holistically per element. Ms. Utecht explained how she would compile the ratings to provide average scores per item and overall. It will not include names, but only scores. She gave an example. There is another 360 evaluation that will also be used by staff. Council will see those scores as well. Councilor Moore asked for clarification on Question 1 under Element B. Ms. Utecht said part of career development and growth is to have staff present to the Council. If there is an issue that comes up, the City Manager would work to build a good relationship between staff and the Council so they could be more effective. Mr. Grimaldi said he sees it differently. The Mayor and Council set the policies for the City and staff supports those policies. In order to accomplish Council’s goals and objectives, staff needs to work as a team. Councilor asked about Question 7 in Element E, “Professional Leadership: Seeks roles in local and regional organizations”. She is thinking that many of the staff are involved in regional organizations City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 22, 2016 Page 4 because it’s not possible for the City Manager to do it all. She asked if it could be restated that it is not just him personally. Councilor Wylie said there has been a formal goal for the City Manager to be involved in civic activities. She did not want to lose that aspect. Councilor Pishioneri said he wants to know what the City Manager is involved with, so feels this question is appropriate. It is also important to note that other staff are involved. Both deserve ratings. Councilor Moore said she felt Questions 1 and 2 under Element F: External Stakeholder Relations referred to Councilor Wylie’s concern. Following further discussion, it was decided to make the following changes: • Element E: Change #7 to “Seeks visible leadership roles in local and regional organizations on behalf of the City”. (focused on the City Manager) • Element E: Add #9 “Supports staff in their endeavors in organizational leadership activities” Councilor VanGordon asked if they could consider flipping the scoring so the higher number is 5. He referred to the definitions at the bottom of page 1 and said they would need to collectively discuss the results. He is not sure why the results are anonymous, and he is fine listing his name. Councilor Moore said she would prefer to leave it anonymous in case there are concerns with future City Manager’s. Ms. Utecht said the Councilors could let Gino know individually what they said if they wanted him to know. Councilor VanGordon asked if they could move the two questions from Element G to Element B. He asked if the Council could get the results from the 360 evaluations before they start their evaluations. Ms. Utecht said doing that would push the evaluation date several weeks out. Councilor Pishioneri said he would also like to see the City Manager’s self-evaluation prior to doing their evaluation. Ms. Utecht said she could get it out to staff, calculate the results, and send it out to the Mayor and Council with the revised form around March 16. She will send out the form and they can start working on it. She will get the results of the 360 to Council before they submit their results. The City Manager could finish his self-evaluation in narrative form by mid-March. Mayor Lundberg said the goals will come from the evaluation. Somewhere they have to decide what to evaluate next year and set the groundwork for what they want worked on. Councilor Wylie said often the evaluation stems from the job description. Mr. Grimaldi said the elements that have been developed outline what he needs to be doing. ADJOURNMENT City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes February 22, 2016 Page 5 The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Minutes Recorder – Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ____________________ Amy Sowa City Recorder City of Springfield Regular Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY MARCH 21, 2016 The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, March 21, 2016 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Moore, Ralston, Woodrow and Pishioneri. 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). PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Lundberg. SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Claims a. Approval of February 2016, Disbursements for Approval. 2. Minutes a. February 8, 2016 – Work Session b. February 16, 2016 – Work Session 3. Resolutions 4. Ordinances a. ORDINANCE NO. 6345 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.300 REGARDING SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF TOBACCO, TOBACCO PRODUCTS, AND INHALANT DELIVERY SYSTEMS TO MINORS. b. ORDINANCE NO. 6346 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 7.450 and 7.452 REGARDING TOBACCO AND INHALANT DELIVERY SYSTEM VENDING. c. ORDINANCE NO. 6347 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5, “PUBLIC PROTECTION” SECTION 5.104 “MISDEMEANORS AND VIOLATIONS – STATE STATUTES ADOPTED” OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE (SMC) TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE, OREGON REVISED STATUTES (ORS) CHAPTERS 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 181, 471, 475 AND ORS 480.110 TO 480.160 THEREBY ADOPTING STATE ORS CRIMINAL STATUTES. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 2 d. ORDINANCE NO. 6348 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2, “GOVERNMENT AND ADMINISTRATION” SECTION 2.005 “TERRITORY - WARDS” OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE (SMC) TO ADOPT LEGISLATIVE CHANGES REGARDING SIZE OF PRECINCTS 5. Other Routine Matters a. Allow Construction Activities Outside of the Hours of 7am and 6pm, in Order to Complete Construction Activities in Association with the Repair of a Leaking Water Service at 3693 East Game Farm Road. b. Approve the Amendments to the Budget Committee Bylaws. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). ITEMS REMOVED PUBLIC HEARINGS - Please limit comments to 3 minutes. Request to speak cards are available at both entrances. Please present cards to City Recorder. Speakers may not yield their time to others. 1. Amend the Springfield Development Code to Regulate the Time, Place and Manner by Which Land and Buildings may be Used to Produce, Process, Sell Wholesale and Sell Retail Recreational Marijuana and Recreational Marijuana Products. ORDINANCE NO. 5 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 3.2-310 AND 3.2-410 ADDING VARIOUS RECREATONAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES TO SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; SECTION 4.7-177 ADDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES; AND SECTIONS 3.2-210, 3.2-415, 3.2-610, AND 3.4-255 PROHIBITING RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES; ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (FIRST READING) Jim Donovan, Planning Supervisor, presented the staff report on this item. The proposed amendments to the Springfield Development Code are the result of 3 work sessions and a single public hearing of the Planning Commission. These proposals regulate the time; place; and manner by which land and buildings may be used and occupied for purposes of producing, processing, selling wholesale and selling retail recreational marijuana and recreational marijuana products. These regulations include relevant statutory requirements for setbacks from schools and other licensed marijuana businesses; identify specific zoning districts where these various uses are permitted; and identify specific zoning districts or locations where these various uses are prohibited. The Springfield City Council conducted a work session on November 9, 2015 to begin consideration of new land use regulations for state licensed medical and recreational marijuana business activities. Council directed staff to work with the Planning Commission to research the zoning issues and recommend a package of code revisions for Council review and adoption. The code proposal was developed with Planning Commission, industry and public input prior to the Planning Commission City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 3 recommendation of approval to City Council. The City Council may approve, amend or extend review of the recommended code amendments prior to adoption scheduled for April 4, 2016. Mr. Donovan reviewed the uses and the special standards associated with the different uses as outlined in Attachment 2 of the agenda packet. He noted that Springfield does not permit retail outlets to co-locate with any of the industrial uses. While referencing item number 4 regarding setbacks to parks, he noted that he had attended a Willamalane Board Meeting to explain the buffers. The Board was comfortable with the buffer. It exempts the trails at this point. He described the two tier approach to indoor growth and the different tiers for outdoor growth. Mr. Donovan said staff finds an adequate basis within the criteria of approval to adopt whichever package of time, place and manner the Council may choose. Councilor VanGordon asked about Section G, Planning Review, and under what situations MDS would be utilized for a marijuana related business. Mr. Donovan said if someone had a retail facility that was fully developed or had a recent site plan approval, staff would exercise the MDS provisions and address the requirements of recreational marijuana. It would give staff a chance to verify buffers. Councilor VanGordon asked if that would be for any commercial building, or only if moving a marijuana related business to another marijuana related business. Mr. Donovan said staff would look for the triggers for change of occupancy or a different category. Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing. 1. Bob Keefer, Willamalane Parks and Recreation District Superintendent, Springfield, OR. Mr. Keefer said the Willamalane Board met with Mr. Donovan who explained the complexity of this issue in relation to parks. What is unique about Springfield is the combination of school parks working together to site public facilities together. So many of our parks are already within the 1000 foot buffer of the State statute for schools. The 500 foot buffer didn’t have a great impact on that provision, but gave the buffer they want. The Board appreciated being able to comment and authorize Mr. Keefer to provide a letter to the Council recommending the Council support the proposal. 2. Karl Mueller, Springfield, OR. Mr. Mueller said he was here on behalf of his client who opposes a portion of the ordinance. They oppose the prohibition of marijuana production facilities in the LMI (Light Medium Industrial) zone and asked the Council to consider allowing production of marijuana in the LMI zone. They believe the meaningful operating characteristics and impacts of a marijuana production facility are similar to the uses allowed in the LMI zone than those allowed in the HI (Heavy Industrial) or SHI (Special Heavy Industrial) zones. He did not see an explanation in any of the materials why any of the zones were selected for prohibition. He found in a Director interpretation as submitted by Wave Holding, LLC, a statement that, “The range of industrial activities is generally broad, but there is an emphasis on production being a phase or two beyond raw material conversion. Marijuana production “growing” is not consistent with the production uses anticipated in this zone, nor is there the expectation of the conversion of raw bulk shipments to finished product.” He feels interpretation of the LMI zone is in error and the ordinance should not be codified by the City in this form. The statement that “growing is not consistent with the production use anticipated City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 4 in the zone” is conclusory, without articulate support and not supported by the evidence in the record. Part of the challenge is that growing, trimming and harvesting marijuana doesn’t fit entirely neatly within any of the industrial zones, but their position is that manufacturing indoor marijuana and the impacts associated with that production is far more similar to the uses and impacts allowed in the LMI zone than those in the HI and SHI zones. He read from the section on LMI in the Springfield Development Code, and noted the term “generally involved (in the secondary processing)”. There is no requirement that uses are always involved in secondary processing or that precludes the primary processing of materials or the production of said materials in the LMI zone. Mayor Lundberg said she would ask Mr. Donovan to clarify his concerns so Council can discuss it further. 3. Dan Larsen, Springfield, OR. Mr. Larsen said marijuana is against federal law and any rules and regulations the Council enacts would also be against federal law. 4. Kris McAlister, Springfield, OR. Mr. McAlister said the Planning Commission did their job well and he felt the elected leadership and City leadership has been open to conversations about this topic. He felt that being more inclusive in the coming year would be beneficial to try to understand that Springfield stands on its own and does not follow other communities. There are things in this plan that he does not agree with, but he feels it is a good step in the right direction. He would like to make sure they separate recreational from medical marijuana in all of their processes. Each individual has their own needs that need to be considered. 5. Jessi Preston, Springfield, OR. Ms. Preston said the decisions made here will affect how big business looks at our community and whether or not they want to come in and bring money into our community. Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing. NO ACTION REQUESTED. FIRST READING ONLY. Mayor Lundberg asked Mr. Donovan to address the testimony on LMI. Mr. Donovan said when working with the Planning Commission, they considered some of the olfactory impacts of large marijuana grows. He described the size of the grows they considered and how they determined the square footage. In considering those potential impacts, and from concerns from people living near small grows where there is a substantial olfactory impact, it was necessary to use the average person reasonable test approach of having both size and distance limitations, and having them located in HI districts where olfactory impacts are anticipated from large operations. Using those three factors and addressing the processing of raw materials may fit better with the HI zone. Mr. Towery noted that Mr. Mueller provided his testimony in writing, which would be provided to the Council and City Attorney. Councilor Pishioneri said he personally disagreed with the use of marijuana and intoxicants, but as an elected official he must represent the people. He also represents people who are in business or trying to start a business in Springfield, and this is a business venture. He would like to propose eliminating the over and above state standards for buffers for retail sales of marijuana so everyone is on the same City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 5 playing field. Current regulations do not regulate how many bars or restaurants can be located within 1000 feet. This is a buffer on business which he disagrees with, and feels we should treat all businesses the same. He asked that they strike anything over and above state law in regards to retail sales buffers. Councilor Ralston asked if there was an example he could show on the map. Councilor Pishioneri said it would leave only the state buffers for schools and many of our parks are protected by that buffer. Mayor Lundberg said the way it is currently written, two retail businesses could not locate next to each other. Councilor Pishioneri reiterated that he opposes the use of intoxicants, but he has a responsibility to the people of the community. This is about being open for business in Springfield. If it is a legal business, we should be open for all businesses. Councilor Ralston said he agreed. Putting restrictions on legal businesses is being biased. Mr. Donovan said the buffers were considered by the Planning Commission, and were based on restrictions of medical marijuana dispensaries. Ms. Smith confirmed that they were talking about resale outlets only, the 1000 foot buffer from other recreational marijuana retail businesses. There is also a proposed 50 foot buffer separately a marijuana retail outlet from residential districts or 500 feet from parks. Councilor Pishioneri said he wanted it to conform to State law. Mr. Donovan said during the Planning Commission discussions they looked at perpetuating the State system, and had the support of the existing business community for recreational and medical marijuana. The Planning Commission discussed the balance in being business friendly. After thoughtful discussion, the Planning Commission and staff recommendation is to stay with the State regulations regarding school and dispensary buffers of 1000 feet. The 50 foot buffer to residential is not in the State statute, nor is the separation from parks. Councilor Pishioneri confirmed that he wanted the 1000 foot buffer between retail businesses to be removed. He is fine leaving the 50 foot residential buffer and the 500 foot park buffer. Councilor Moore said zoning restrictions are much easier to remove than to add. Since we don’t have a history of dealing with recreational marijuana businesses, she would like to see the buffer kept in the ordinance and revisiting it in a year to see if they should be lifted. Councilor Woodrow said she is fine with Councilor Pishioneri’s proposal. We don’t currently restrict other businesses from locating next to each other. They need to be fair and treat all businesses the same. She feels the businesses will sort themselves out. Councilor VanGordon agreed and said if they just look at them as businesses, they should be treated like other businesses. He is supportive of removing the 1000 foot buffer between businesses, especially since we don’t have a good explanation of why it was added. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 6 Mayor Lundberg said she was fine either way. She would like to see the information about the LMI zone and why it should be allowed. If we are business friendly, we need to be consistently business friendly. This is a first reading so there is time to make changes. Councilor Ralston said the issue he sees is the odor and we haven’t had to deal with that in the past. Normally uses in the LMI zone don’t cause an odor. If there was a way to resolve that, he would be fine removing buffers. Mayor Lundberg said she would like to get all information and arguments for and against the buffer before having a final discussion and making a decision. Mr. Donovan said staff would look at location of LMI zones proximate directly to LDR zones. They will also look at indoor and outdoor. It may take a modification of the HI or LMI zoning district which may require more time. Mayor Lundberg asked that when they come back to discuss this, he identify LMI, HI and SHI so they can see them in groupings and how many there are. Councilor Pishioneri asked that staff also check exhaust air treatment modification and how effective that might be to mitigate the odor. Mr. Donovan said in addition to location and zoning regulations, staff will look at some of the mitigation techniques as well. Councilor VanGordon said information on the mitigation techniques will be helpful. There are a lot of residential areas, especially in his ward, that are adjacent to LMI zones. Ms. Smith said they could bring this forward on April 4 for another first reading. Council could make a motion and take a vote on the retail to retail buffer, and staff could have that prepared for April 4. Staff will also do the research on the industrial zoning and bring that information. Mr. Donovan said due to public involvement, he would recommend another public hearing be held regarding the 1000 foot buffers. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WOODROW TO CHANGE ORDINANCE NO. 5 UNDER THE HEADING OF RETAIL TO STRIKE THE STATEMENT OF THE 1000 FOOT BUFFER FOR THE SEPARATION OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA RETAIL BUSINESSES FROM ALL OTHER MARIJUANA RETAIL OUTLETS. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 IN FAVOR AND 0 OPPOSED (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). Mayor Lundberg said this would come back for another public hearing. 2. Business License Regulations for Recreational Marijuana Businesses. ORDINANCE NO. 6 – AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTIONS 7.1100-7.1104 TO CHAPTER 7 OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL REGARDING RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA BUSINESSES (FIRST READING) Mary Bridget Smith, City Attorney, presented the staff report on this item. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 7 Under House Bill 3400 (2015), local governments may pass ordinances relating to and governing the production, use, sale, and licensing of recreational marijuana. The City seeks to adopt reasonable regulations governing recreational marijuana businesses in the City of Springfield. Council is in the process of considering development code amendments adopting land use regulations for medical and recreational marijuana businesses. Medical marijuana dispensaries are currently required to obtain a business license from the City under SMC 7.600 et seq, but there is no such requirement for recreational marijuana businesses. City staff recommends that recreational marijuana business regulations be adopted at the same time as the associated land use regulations in order to prevent a gap during which these businesses are allowed under the development code, but not regulated by the municipal code. The attached ordinance is modeled after the medical marijuana dispensary regulations, with modifications as appropriate under state law for recreational marijuana businesses. The ordinance accomplishes the following: • Creates definitions for regulation • Requires recreational marijuana businesses to obtain a business license, pay a fee and abide by adopted regulations; creates separate licenses and fees for retail and non-retail businesses (i.e. processors, producers, wholesalers). • Requires all employees to undergo a background check • New recreational marijuana businesses shall locate in accordance with state regulations and local zoning regulations • Precludes minors on site except where allowed under state regulations. • Requires compliance with the City sign ordinance • Requires compliance with the City alarm code (alarm systems are required under OLCC regulation) • Sets hours of operation (consistent with OLCC regulations for retail sales). • Precludes free distribution • Precludes public consumption on site. Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing. 1. Dan Larsen, Springfield, OR. Mr. Larsen recommended that the City Council not give any marijuana dispensaries permission to sell within the City limits. It is in violation of Federal law to allow this to happen. 2. Kris McAlister, Springfield, OR. Mr. McAlister said there are two documents the Council may want to consider – the Ogden memorandum and the Cole Memorandum which give clear instructions on how businesses, if by motion of the members of the State to do certain things regarding cannabis, there are ways to do it and ways not to do it. These documents are great for setting up our system. He has issues with businesses, especially those selling both medicinal and recreational marijuana, being refrained from giving away free items, especially for those in hospice and low-income. As those are not set by a cap, these are open to the free market and people’s health is a high commodity. Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing. NO ACTION REQUESTED. FIRST READING ONLY. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 8 Ms. Smith noted an error in the agenda item summary stating an emergency clause. This ordinance does not have an emergency clause and will come back for a second reading. 3. Amendments to Medical Marijuana Business Regulations. ORDINANCE NO. 6349 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 7.601, DEFINITIONS, AND 7.603, OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS, REGARDING MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Mary Bridget Smith, City Attorney, presented the staff report on this item. Under SB 1531 (2014) local governments may impose “reasonable regulations” on dispensaries. The City has determined that current state regulation of dispensaries under HB 3400 (2015) is consistent with City policy. The City seeks to amend its medical marijuana regulations to be consistent with State regulation of the packaging and labeling of marijuana, conditions under which minors are allowed in dispensaries, and the definitions of marijuana under state law. HB 3400 (2015) mandates that the State adopt labeling regulations and regulations requiring child- resistant safety packaging for marijuana and marijuana items. Due to these new state labeling and packaging regulations, municipal regulation of packaging and labeling is no longer necessary to enforce City policy. Under OAR 333-008-1220, adopted pursuant to HB 3400 (2015), all useable marijuana and marijuana items must be labeled with the following information: • The amount of THC and CBD potency • The weight of flowers or plant material, or weight or volume of usable marijuana in the packaged finished product for marijuana items • Test batch number and date tested • Who performed the testing • A label for flowers or useable plant material describing the strain • A warning label for edibles which states: “WARNING: MEDICINAL PRODUCT – KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN” in bold font and a size that is larger than the font size of the other printing on the label. After HB 3400 passed, medical marijuana statutes were renumbered. Accordingly, references to ORS chapter 475 need to be updated to the new statute numbers in chapter 475B. In addition, HB 3400 corrected an error in the definition of “marijuana” that previously miscategorized the plant family of Cannabis, and the correct definition should be incorporated into the Municipal Code. The proposed ordinance also repeals the prohibition against minors entering any portion of a dispensary, as result of feedback to City from dispensary stakeholders. Areas where usable marijuana is located would remain off-limits to minors by OHA regulations; this ordinance would not affect minors in recreational retail businesses. These regulations will become effective immediately if adopted under emergency procedures. Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing. 1. Dan Larsen, Springfield, OR. Mr. Larsen reminded Council of the people who have been endangered and hurt with marijuana. Recently, a house blew up when someone was City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 9 processing it for the oil. It is a threat to the community and his neighbors. He feels the Council doesn’t have our children’s best interests in mind. There are overdoses when children get ahold of marijuana products. They need to look at the laws. Dispensing and use of marijuana is against federal law and Springfield is going against what is in that law. He can’t understand how they can continue processing and giving permission for a drug which is intoxicating and damaging to young people, causing brain damage. It’s like selling drugs to support schools. 2. Jessi Preston, Springfield, OR. Ms. Preston referred to the provision of allowing children in the dispensary and said it is the same as taking your child with you to the pharmacy. It is just as safe. There are many laws in place so there is no one using it at the site. The establishment should be a safe environment if it is following all of the regulations. 3. Kris McAlister, Springfield, OR. Mr. McAlister thanked the City for the adjustment to the lobbyist. Children should not be left in vehicles while people wait in line to get their legally obtained cannabis. Having these rules and having an engagement with these people will allow the community to understand the real dangers. He asked that when they consider the legality of this product, they make sure there are safe places in our community for product to be dropped off to be blasted, which is currently illegal by our State without a permit. Part of the issue includes not being done through medical blasting, but through consumers trying to make their own medicine avoiding costs and regulations. These are people who are not going to follow the rules anyway. He asked that the City look at options where we can have safe areas for people to go, or incentives for businesses to come here and put the burden into the hands of people who are trained to make the system as compliant with federal law where possible, state law, and engaging with the people as they are, not as we want them to be. Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6349. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). 4. Master Fees and Charges Schedule – Spring 2016 Update. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-05 – A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD ADOPTING A MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE FOR FEES, CHARGES, RATES, PERMITS AND LICENSES AS ESTABLISHED BY THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE, FIRE CODE, AND BUILDING CODE. Bob Duey, Finance Director, presented the staff report on this item. Mr. Duey said this is a follow-up from the work session held Monday, March 14 in which they discussed adjusting the Master Fee Schedule. The packet includes information describing all of the changes under consideration that are not just based on a cost of living adjustment (COLA) change. The full Master Fee Schedule is also included in the packet and includes those changes as well as the COLA changes. He referred to the manufactured dwelling park license which they evened out to make it more consistent and uniform. They changed the name of the Commercial Plan Check fee, which is now the Fire Code Plan Check fee. He noted other changes discussed last week, including the Building Fees which were recommended by the State. Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 10 No one appeared to speak. Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2016-05. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE 1. Dan Larsen, Springfield, OR. Mr. Larsen spoke regarding the ordinance related to panhandling and the fines for giving items to those in the roadway. Living in Springfield for 20 years, he goes through the intersection at Gateway and Beltline often. There are often panhandlers at that site, and he has witnessed near accidents at that location several times. He has seen cars stop even at green lights in order to give, nearly causing rear-end collisions. He feels it is an unsafe situation having panhandlers soliciting drivers. The other issue is the trash left behind by the panhandlers. Other cities have similar ordinances in Oregon, and they also have it in Boise, ID where his daughter lives. He asked the Council to pass the ordinance. 2. Michael Carrigan, Eugene, OR. Mr. Carrigan is staff support for the Springfield Shelter Rights Alliance, a program of Springfield Alliance for Equality and Respect (SAFER). He thanked the City for their role in creating the G Street Oasis project. It is a wonderful collaboration and helps scores of families in Springfield. He spoke regarding rest stops in Eugene and would like to propose those in Springfield. Square One Village in Eugene has been incredibly successful and a model to the world. At the last Eugene City Council meeting, the Council voted unanimously to authorize the rest stops for another year. He felt rest stops would work well in Springfield, too, and don’t cost the cities or county any money. They are supported by the people that run and support them. Mr. Carrigan said he is mainly here to speak in opposition of the ordinance banning panhandling on public roadways. The ordinance is unneeded and unfair, and that there are existing statutes that address reckless driving and impeding traffic. For many unhoused folks, especially single men, asking for donations on a street corner is how they survive. It is wrong to make it more difficult for concerned drivers to help out those in need. He referred to a non-housed veteran who goes to ‘work’ everyday on a corner in Eugene and makes just enough to get by. He doesn’t want to make it more difficult for those trying to earn money or those wishing to help. 3. Sue Sierralupe, Eugene, OR. Ms. Sierralupe said her business is located in Springfield. She was raised in a very religious family that taught her that volunteer work is an obligation, not an option. Happily, she gains much from her volunteer work, donating her free time to Lane County Master Gardener’s Association, Mt. Pisgah Arboretum, and Occupy Medical. There are a myriad of jobs she can perform, the majority of them center on education, problem solving, public outreach, and non-glamorous jobs that involve cleaning products. The non- profits that she volunteers for survive through public support, just as the unhoused citizens do. Some volunteers she serves with feel begging is beneath them, but if she does not ask the organizations will cease to exist. This is also true for the unhoused who need a place to ask for money or supplies legally. She can assure them that anyone who tells you that service organizations such as hers are up to the task of keeping the economically destitute in this City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 11 country or county afloat is lying. They are overwhelmed and don’t have the staff or resources to handle the job. Our unhoused patients at Occupy Medical often come for medical attention caused by exposure and malnutrition. They know and use the charity resources yet, they are hungry, cold and weary. Usually, cash in hand means they can rent a hotel room, buy groceries or a tarp. None of us in this community are fooled by the line that panhandling is a traffic concern. Handing something out a car window does not endanger anyone. Asking for help is wise. Do not outlaw kindness, people need to give. 4. Kris McAlister, Springfield, OR. Mr. McAlister asked Council to consider some alternatives when it comes to code enforcement within our community. We all live in our own bubbles and sometimes find other people’s yard or cars problematic. Currently, we have an anonymous complaint system where people can’t face their accusers, and are often the only ones in their neighborhood being warned. He asked that they consider how they have solved other problems. Several years ago we did not have a coordinated volunteer program, and now we have a paid city staffer with a great program. He suggested we consider having an ombudsman who reaches out if there is a complaint, allows it to be resolved before a warning letter or a paper trail is started. 5. Dakota Weitman, Springfield, OR. Mr. Weitman spoke regarding the panhandling ordinance. The City Council has decided to phrase this as a public safety issue and in doing so is criminalizing the act of goodwill. Without substantial evidence that there is a public safety concern, he asked why they were intent on creating an undue conflict that will only make citizens feel as though they need to look over their shoulder to see if their generous acts will instead be viewed as a criminal one. This conflict extends to private businesses that should not have to deal with pedestrians and vehicles taking up spaces in their parking lots to transfer funds. The City Council is putting an undue burden on those of us who have done nothing wrong in an attempt to clean up the area. He is 100% for making our streets safer, but thinks we should tackle real issues such as distracted driving, well lit streets and crosswalks, all of which would benefit everyone rather than a select few. Without substantial evidence for public safety concern, he contends that the City Council does not intend in actively listening to the public on this issue, but instead are feeling a legal obligation to public comment before moving forward with their own pre-determined agenda. He urged the City Council to treat their elected position with more respect. COUNCIL RESPONSE CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS BIDS ORDINANCES 1. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6, Vehicles and Traffic, Adding Section 6.112 to the Springfield Municipal Code, Unlawful Transfer on Vehicular Portion of the Right-of-Way. ORDINANCE NO. 8 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6, VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC, ADDING SECTION 6.112 TO THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE, UNLAWFUL TRANSFER ON VEHICULAR PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OFWAY (FIRST READING) City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 12 Tim Doney, Chief of Police, and Mary Bridget Smith, City Attorney, presented the staff report on this item. The revised ordinance would prohibit motor vehicles from stopping in the roadway for the purpose of transferring property to pedestrians and does not exempt situations where drivers or passengers donate to persons asking for charitable contributions under a pedestrian activity permit. Council had asked for some additional information which he will be providing. He noted that transfer of property is not a crime, but would be illegal if passed by the Council. It would be similar to a traffic violation and people could not be arrested or have a criminal history. Chief Doney reported on statistics related to accidents attributed to this type of activity at intersections. There are dozens, if not hundreds of accidents and this would require a labor intensive hand search and staff was unable to do that in time for this meeting. He spoke with the motor officers on the traffic team asking them of any recent accidents where transfer was a contributing a factor. They did not, however mentioned that it was a safety issue due to traffic being impeded when this activity occurs, especially at busy intersections. They do, on occasion, cite people under Oregon Revised Statutes related to traffic such as impeding traffic. The City Attorney prepared a memo that outlined some of the specifics in reference to impeding traffic. The other ORS that was quoted by the officers was improper position upon a highway. They are both Class D state traffic infractions with a minimum fine of $60 and maximum fine of $250, with the presumptive standing fine of $110. Between January of 2015 and present date, they have issued 9 citations in the City for impeding traffic and 19 citations for improper position upon a highway. During that time period, there have been 49 crashes in the City that involved an automobile and pedestrian, resulting in 8 fatalities, accounting for about 10-11% of the statewide fatalities. Two weeks ago, Chief Doney observed the intersection of Beltline and Gateway. In a 20-minute period, he observed one gentleman soliciting from at least three vehicles in the roadway and one did impeded traffic. When talking to people in the department, one of the employees mentioned that they had been involved in a car accident in Eugene in which cars in front of them had stopped to make a donation and was rear-ended. Chief Doney said per Council direction, the exemption for charities was removed. This does not stop the act of giving or being benevolent, but moves it outside of the roadway to a safe location. When he worked in Medford where they had a similar ordinance, he found that the signage helped to move the transfer of property out of the roadway. It didn’t stop it, but moved it to an adjacent property where the property owners didn’t have an issue with it. Chief Doney also noted that under the proposed ordinance, the maximum fine was $50, substantially less than the presumptive fine by state statute. Councilor Pishioneri explained the presumptive fine. Mayor Lundberg thanked staff for making the changes to the ordinance. Councilor Ralston said he was opposed to taking out the exemption. He noted that the Mayor said she would not sign this if they left the exemption in the ordinance, yet the City Council makes the decision. Mayor Lundberg said she just wouldn’t sign it. Councilor Ralston said the exemption is for those that get permits and are just out one a year. He didn’t have a problem. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 13 Mr. Grimaldi said if the Mayor did not want to sign it would go into effect without a signature. Councilor Pishioneri said there was a process where it could be brought back for further consideration. He agreed that groups that had proper permits and cones, etc. could be made safe. Mayor Lundberg said it was not only the firefighters, there are other groups. Councilor Woodrow said she is in favor of removing the exemption. She has appreciated the fundraising efforts of firefighters, but has also seen traffic safety issues even with the precautions they take. She feels it is necessary to be fair. We are looking at this as a safety issue and not targeted to a specific group. If this is to go forward as a safety issues, which she believes it is, it needs to apply to everyone. If people want to fundraise or panhandle, it needs to be off the street so there are no issues. Councilor VanGordon asked if there had been discussions with the firefighters about the exemption being pulled. Ms. Smith said she spoke to them originally to find out their process. They didn’t talk about the details about their position on the ordinance. Councilor VanGordon said without that discussion, they don’t know if it would be a hardship for them. He asked what the non-profit groups that get a permit are required to do besides have insurance. Ms. Smith said for the pedestrian activity permit, there is a definition for soliciting contributions for a non-profit. They are required to wear reflective clothing, have signs, have insurance, and get the permit ahead of time. Even with those things in place, they are not supposed to impede traffic out in the roadway. Councilor VanGordon asked if those with a permit could be cited for impeding traffic. Ms. Smith said she believed they could. When she spoke to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) permit tech, she was told that when the permit is approved, it is not a license to go out and be unsafe in the roadway. The Statute where the pedestrian activity permit comes in is a pedestrian statute. Councilor VanGordon asked if a driver stopped to give to a permitted charity and impeded traffic, they could be cited. Ms. Smith said potentially. The impeding traffic violation is very broad. The proposed unlawful transfer ordinance is a prohibition against that activity. Councilor VanGordon said he is comfortable moving forward with the ordinance in general because it is a safety issue. The citation for this ordinance is quite a bit less than the Statute of impeding traffic. He agrees it’s more consistent to say it is not allowed for anyone, but the firefighters are a great partner and he doesn’t want to impact them. He would be comfortable leaving the exemption out, and then hearing from the firefighters and other non-profits. He asked Chief Doney if the officers had noticed the same safety risk with non-profits as they did with individuals. Councilor Woodrow said if they are going to consider the hardship on non-profits, he also needs to consider the hardship on the panhandlers. It needs to be consistent and fair across the board. Her career City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 14 is in social service so she is not immune to what it is happening. She felt they couldn’t make an exception for non-profits. Mayor Lundberg said when the firefighters are out soliciting they are not out there as firefighters, but as solicitors. They are basing this on safety and to her it is black and white. If it is based on safety, either no one is allowed to do it or everyone is allowed to do it. The non-profits will find other ways to raise funds if this is no longer an option. People can be on the sidewalk asking people to pull into a parking lot to give. She felt the grocery stores and businesses may appreciate helping in that way. Councilor Moore said she asked Mitham Clement, head of the local Salvation Army, if they could set aside one day a month for bell ringers to collect money outside grocery stores to give to those in need. We are a very creative group of people and there are other ways to make it (donating) easier, but in an area that’s controlled. Ms. Smith said this is a first reading so no action is requested. She will do some additional research on the firefighter’s position. They will bring it back to the next Regular Meeting for a vote. BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL 1. Committee Appointments a. Budget Committee Appointments. Bob Duey, Finance Director, presented the staff report on this item. Three vacancies have occurred on the City’s Budget Committee due to the term expirations of members from the Ward 3, Ward 5 and Ward 6 positions. Each full term of the Budget Committee is for a 3-year period, with the positions staggered to have two vacancies occur every December. After interviews on March 17th, Council members directed staff to prepare for the appointment of Nathan Mischel for Ward 3, Victoria Doyle for Ward 5 and Diana Alldredge for Ward 6. The City’s charge for the Budget Committee states as a qualifier 6 members from the Council and 6 citizens by Ward (Citizen members may not be officers, agents or employees of the City, per ORS 294.336(4). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO APPOINT NATHAN MISCHEL TO SERVE A 1-YEAR TERM ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR WARD 3 WITH A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2016. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO APPOINT VICTORIA DOYLE TO SERVE A 3-YEAR TERM ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR WARD 5 WITH A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2018. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 15 IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO APPOINT DIANA ALLDREDGE TO SERVE A 3-YEAR TERM ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR WARD 6 WITH A TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2018. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). b. Historic Commission Appointments. Mark McCaffery, Planner, presented the staff report on this item. The Springfield Historic Commission has four vacancies; two term expirations and two resignations. The two vacant positions created by term expiration will be filled with four-year terms. The two vacant positions created by resignations will be filled for the unexpired portion of each term. The appointment schedule is designed to maintain expertise and institutional knowledge by overlapping appointments. The Historic Commission is authorized and guided by provisions contained in Chapter 2 of the City’s Municipal Code. The Code authorizes the Mayor and City Council to fill unexpired portions of commissioner terms upon resignation and appoint new members using staggered term membership. The Code also requires the Council to solicit recommendations from the Willamalane Park and Recreation District and Lane County School District #19 (Springfield schools). The City received three applications for the four vacancies duly noticed. The Council interviewed Ms. Koenig and Ms. Karp at the February 22, 2016 Work Session and interviewed Mr. Siegle at the March 14, 2016 Work Session. Ms. Koenig is a Willamalane employee who was recommended by Willamalane to succeed Vincent Martorello’s term as a commissioner. The appointment of Ms. Koenig to fill the unexpired portion of Commissioner Vincent Martorello’s term and appointment of Ms. Karp and Mr. Siegle to fill the four-year term vacancies would be consistent with the Council’s post-interview assessment of each candidate. Appointments to the Historic Commission must be confirmed during a Regular Session by motion and a vote of the City Council. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO APPOINT KRISTINA KOENIG TO THE HISTORIC COMMISSION TO SERVE THE UNEXPIRED PORTION OF COMMISSIONER VINCENT MARTORELLO’S TERM, WHICH EXPIRES FEBRUARY 2, 2018. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO APPOINT MACKENZIE KARP AND JONATHAN SIEGLE TO THE HISTORIC COMMISSION FOR FOUR-YEAR TERMS EXPIRING ON MARCH 20, 2020. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). 2. Business from Council BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER 1. Approval to Lease/Purchase One (1) Fire Pumper. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 16 Joe Zaludek, Deputy Fire Chief, presented the staff report on this item. Fire & Life Safety (FLS) is seeking approval to lease purchase one (1) fire pumper for front-line service. The current 75’ ladder truck is a 2001 E-One that has exceeded its’ reliable lifespan and is in need of replacement. This apparatus has operated as a first-out engine at fire station #14 (4765 Main Street station), in east Springfield for the past 15 years. This is the second aerial apparatus in the Springfield fleet. This request is to replace the existing 75’ ladder with a pumper. This will reduce purchase costs, and save on maintenance costs long term. Eugene has an aerial apparatus in reserve that is already being used by Springfield when needed as per IGA. The E-One apparatus currently has approximately 108,000 miles. Increasing maintenance costs and general wear and tear on this apparatus make replacement of it a high priority. This is the last of the five (5) first out apparatus to be replaced. Three (3) pumpers were replaced in 2010 and the 100’ Pierce aerial platform in 2013. Cooperative purchasing language in an existing Fire-Rescue Group Purchasing Contract with Pierce Manufacturing was available to procure this new Pierce Velocity Pumper. The City is using a five year lease purchase option, based on the significant cost of the apparatus. The first two payments on the lease could come from the Vehicle & Equipment Replacement Fund (Fund 713). In years 3-5 funds currently dedicated to fire engine/pumper leases could be used to make the $127,628 per year payments. This is an identical pumper to the most recent City of Eugene pumper purchases and represents the joint equipment standard for Eugene Springfield Fire. Additionally, efficiencies are gained by having all of the equipment and supplies in the exact same place when providing emergency response services – seconds count. Pierce’s price represents a good value for the investment, and will maintain interoperability with Eugene Fire’s current/future apparatus plans. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN A CONTRACT TO LEASE PURCHASE ONE (1) FIRE PUMPER FROM PIERCE MANUFACTURING, INC. FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $593,108.00. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR VANGORDON TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A 5-YEAR, TAX EXEMPT, LEASE PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH PNC EQUIPMENT FINANCE TO FINANCE THE PUMPER. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE). 2. Other Business BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 21, 2016 Page 17 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned 8:36 p.m. Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ____________________ City Recorder