Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/28/2016 Work Session City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY MARCH 28,2016 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room,225 Fifth Street, Springfield,Oregon, on Monday March 28,2016 at 5:30 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). 1. Fiscal Year 2015 Federal Grant Compliance Report. Nathan Bell,Accounting Manager,presented the staff report on this item. On January 19,2016 the auditors presented the annual audit and CAFR to the Council. In accordance with compliance requirements related to the City expending more than $500,000 in federal awards,the City is required to complete an A-133 audit(the Single Audit). The Single Audit has now been completed and will be presented. Kylie McCloskey and Chuck Swank,of Grove,Mueller& Swank, will review the audit process,the Independent Auditor's Reports, and the City's Federal Grant Compliance Report during the work session. Mr. Swank said when they were here in January,there was discussion about the federal compliance audit. The City is required to engage their external auditor to audit a certain percentage of federal dollars whenever the City expends more than$500,000 in federal dollars.Because the City met that threshold,the City was required to have an annual financial statement audit,but also a federal compliance audit. The auditors don't look at every program or every dollar. It is a rotational emphasis on the amount of dollars spent.A formula determines which programs are audited in which year. Programs the City spends a significant amount of dollars have to be audited every third year.They were already scheduled to audit the City's Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)funds in 2015. His report includes a schedule of federal dollars spent on what programs. They are required to have two reports: 1)the Auditor's Report on Internal Control and Compliance(a broad report done in conjunction with the audit on the City's financial statements—completed in December with no findings); and 2)an opinion on the federal programs they audited this year. In their opinion on federal compliance,they believe their audit is a reasonable basis for compliance on the federal programs audited; however,their audit does not provide a legal determination of the City's compliance. The federal compliance is for performance. Mr. Swank said the first finding was that the City was not timely in filing reports on expenditures. Most federal agencies require the City to file quarterly reports,which was not done for several quarters. The second finding was that staff had questions about how to handle sub-recipients. Sometimes cities have another governmental agency or non-profit expend the funds under their guidance. Those agencies are called the sub-recipients. Springfield is the sub-recipient of funds from State of Oregon. The City has a responsibility to make sure the sub-recipients are doing everything required under the grant, and the second finding relates to notification procedures,monitoring and follow-up on sub-recipient dollars. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 28,2016 Page 2 Mayor Lundberg said that verified what she thought had happened. We had sub-recipients that forgot they were given funds,which was a concern. There was a gray area for reporting. Councilor Pishioneri said based on what he has read, it seems there has been money that was not expended coming back to the City, and lack of tracking.He said it seems to indicate inappropriate expenditure of funds or loss of funds somewhere. He wants to make sure we can where all the funds went. Mr. Swank said there was no inappropriate spending. It is more the documentation so they can follow the trail Mr. Grimaldi said when the City awards the grant,we don't necessarily provide the funds immediately. Funds being returned never left the City. Mr. Swank said they found no inappropriate spending,but more a lack of the documentation trail Sub-recipient monitoring is difficult. The federal government recently has been looking more closely at the tracking,and the City has paid more attention in the last few years to address that. Ms. Fifield said during HUD's monitoring last year,they asked what a contract was awarded for,the amount,was it paid out,was it matching what was drawn from HUD. From those questions,there was a concern from them about documentation. Staff was able to provide documentation, but brought up the question of documentation and how to track it better. Mr. Swank said nothing happens until the dollars are drawn. Mr.Bell said invoices come into the Finance Department who create the voucher.It then goes to Ms. Fifield to review, and then to Tom Boyatt for approval. There are multiple internal controls in place. Mr. Swank said they have performed a single audit for the City for a number of years and they always had good reports. Finance does a really good job. Councilor Pishioneri said he appreciated the openness on the report. Councilor VanGordon asked how they were planning for staff turnover in the future to make sure appropriate processes are in place for documentation. Ms.Fifield said staff is working on that internally and with HUD. Currently,there is an informal process that worked in the past, but nothing was written down.They are formalizing the process and writing it down so any staff member would know the requirements. They are matching it with HUD and other requirements. Mayor Lundberg said part of the result of both Springfield and Eugene not keeping good records is that our CDBG funds got split into a more complicated process. We now are in a different program, which limits our funds. Some people didn't know they had the money available. She is glad Councilor VanGordon asked about steps to make sure we aren't in this situation again. The City needs to do quarterly reports for the federal funds, and then also require sub-recipients to do the same. She would like to see how the sub-recipients are required to report. We need some assurance from the sub- recipients so the City knows the status of the funds. She will always be unhappy that the CDBG and HOME funds were separated due to our reports. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 28,2016 Page 3 Ms. Fifield said staff has started to build processes into the contract which started when they were drafting the contract with NEDCO for SPROUT!. They looked at what Eugene requires for HUD and decided that would work for the quarterly reports showing the work being done. They will build those requirements into the contract to track funds to make sure they are spent down appropriately. If the sub-recipient does not provide the report, staff would check in with them. They haven't developed a plan for what to do if the sub-recipient fails to provide a report. Mayor Lundberg said she thinks that is something Council should discuss. That is why she is hesitant to give NEDCO money because they haven't used the original funding. They need to decide how they want to check in as a Council. Councilor Woodrow said we are adding something in because we have to be responsible for the funds going out to sub-recipients. When requiring reports on a regular basis,there needs to be consequences such as a way to put a hold on any additional funds until the report is received. Mayor Lundberg said part of the issue is reporting, and the other is the fund recipient not doing the project they requested the funding for. Mr. Grimaldi said staff could come back annually to Council to report on all existing grants. There will be circumstances that need explaining,and other cases where the funds need to be reallocated. Sometimes things are beyond the control of the recipient. Councilor Moore said the last report from Ms. Fifield outlined the recipients and where funds were sitting. That report was very helpful. She thought part of the reason the CDBG and HOME Funds were split was because of new HUD regulations. Ms.Fifield said there were two factors that brought about the change. The 2014 HUD monitoring of the HOME Program(Eugene and Springfield Consortium) showed issues with several projects in Springfield.At the same time,HUD requirements were changing and we had to change our process. Mayor Lundberg said it took away Springfield's ability to allocate HOME funds ourselves. Ms.Fifield said HUD sets the percentage of what Springfield is allocated based on population or need compared to Eugene.Eugene now gets the pool of funds, and the intergovernmental agreement(IGA) dictates how decisions are made. The funds are received annually,but it is now up to the Governing Board whether or not there is room to share. The process is more complicated, and we are no longer managing the HOME funds on our own. Mayor Lundberg asked if CDBG funds would be revisited again soon, or would be part of the rotation. Mr. Swank said the auditors must close the loop. Ms.McCloskey said it will depend on what the City's other numbers show. What they audit is formula based. If they receive a lot more CDBG funds next year,and other programs are smaller,they may still have to look at CDBG funds since that is where the bulk of the City's funds are held. There are a number of factors in the formula. They will ask the questions and a look at documentation to close the loop. Mr. Swank said in 2015,the CDBG dollars were almost 50%of the federal dollars. When they are that high,the auditors are required to look at it again sooner. i City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 28,2016 Page 4 Mayor Lundberg said staff will work on our report submittals, put together a paper trail for sub- recipients for reporting and getting the projects done,and a closing the loop report from the audit. Mr. Grimaldi said staff will also come back annually to give Council a status report on outstanding grants. Councilor Woodrow asked if they could get an update in the Communication Packet once they get the forms finalized for reporting. Mayor Lundberg said she wants to keep track of the SPROUT funds. Mr. Grimaldi said next week Council will be allocating HOME funds. Ms.Fifield said a work session will be held on April 18 regarding CDBG allocations. 2. Lane Regional Air Protection Agency(LRAPA)Report. Gino Grimaldi, City Manager,presented the staff report on this item. The intergovernmental agreement to form LRAPA in 1968 has allowed local governments to more effectively and efficiently reduce air pollution and improve air quality within Lane County. LRAPA is asking local jurisdictions to consider an updated IGA to reflect recent changes in Oregon Statutes by the 2015 Legislature. The LRAPA Board of Directors has approved a revised Intergovernmental Agreement consistent with changes in Oregon Statutes by the 2015 Legislature. The statute changes allow a second position for cities with populations under 25,000.For LRAPA,the changes would essentially convert an at-large board position so that both Oakridge and Cottage Grove would have positions on the 9-member LRAPA Board. Springfield currently has two positions,Eugene has four,and Lane County has one. For the revised IGA to take effect,all five IGA partners(Lane County and the cities of Eugene, Springfield, Cottage Grove and Oakridge)would need to approve. Merlyn Hough,Director of LRAPA, and Jo Niehaus,Public Affairs Manager from LRAPA presented a power point on this topic.Mr. Hough referred to topics for discussion: air quality trends in Springfield and Eugene, revised LRAPA IGA,CAC recommended local rule changes,and recent LRAPA website updates. Mr. Hough displayed and explained a chart showing the air quality in the Eugene/Springfield area. For the most part,we have maintained good air quality health standards. Ozone is a summer time problem, but we have been able to maintain good air quality by keeping good ozone numbers. He discussed particulate matter,which was less of a contributor due to the wood industry having effective controls in place. We have seen dramatic improvements with air quality controls at mills and in wood burning. He described the standards and noted that Oakridge is often above the standards. Eugene is approaching the standard; however Springfield and Cottage Grove have stayed consistently below the standard max. He noted that violating the standards had long-term consequences. Mr.Hough spoke regarding the IGA which would allow Oakridge and Cottage Grove to each have a representative on the LRAPA Board. In the past,the other 8 members of the board have selected the at-large position,giving preference for the one at-large seat to rotate between Cottage Grove and City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 28,2016 Page 5 Oakridge. This would provide more consistency.For the revised IGA to take effect, all five IGA partners(Lane County and the cities of Eugene, Springfield, Cottage Grove and Oakridge)would need to approve. Mr.Hough said the Citizen Advisory Committee(CAC)reviews complaints that come into LRAPA. Most complaints have decreased except for two—open burning and home wood heating. He spoke regarding proposed outdoor burning changes: limits size of ceremonial fire(larger fires would require bonfire letter permits with conditions);prohibits outdoor burning in barrels(based on frequent pattern of burning garbage and other prohibited materials);prohibits outdoor burning of grass clippings in Lane County based on heavy smoke;prohibits outdoor burning of fallen leaves within city limits based on heavy smoke; and prohibits outdoor burning in the Eugene and Springfield UGB's.He explained why those changes were being proposed. Mr. Hough spoke regarding proposed home wood heating changes: clarifies that smoke-density limits also apply to low-income exempt homes which are allowed to burn even on RED advisory days; reduces the smoke-density limits to 20%opacity, consistent with Oakridge and other areas in the Pacific Northwest, if approved by Eugene and Springfield in their city ordinances;extends the home wood hearting advisory season to October—May(from November—February)beginning Oct. 1, 2015. Mr.Hough reviewed some of the updates to the website. Mr. Hough said they would like to get the IGA signed by Springfield if they approve, and would also like the Council to provide feedback on the recommended changes to local rules from the CAC. Discussion was held regarding the 20%opacity not being visible. 3 Councilor Moore asked if gas fireplace inserts were allowed anytime since they don't create smoke. Mr.Hough said that was correct. Councilor Moore said she was pleased to see the State providing funds to put in those inserts. Mr. Hough said fireplaces are not energy efficient. Councilor Pishioneri asked about the word"standard"and if it was a state or federal law. Mr.Hough said they are national air quality health standards, set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA)with the advice of a non-EPA group appointed by Congress made up of scientists and medical professionals. They make recommendations to the EPA,who then decide whether or not to take action. The most recent update was in October 2015. Councilor Pishioneri said it made sense to include representatives from Cottage Grove and Oakridge. He had concerns about some of the code changes. Council agreed that the changes in the IGA were appropriate. It will be brought to the Council during a regular meeting for formal approval. Councilor Pishioneri spoke regarding the proposed code changes. The trend shows that Springfield is below the standards so he sees no need to place controls on our citizens. We have some complaints, City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 28,2016 Page 6 but part of that may be due to more outreach. He doesn't want to put restrictions on citizens if he can't show there is an issue. He asked about the size of ceremonial fires allowed currently. Mr.Hough said currently it does not specify the size.A three-foot diameter was first requested by the tribes. They found that people claimed large fires were ceremonial fires. These fires were actually as large as bon fires and presented a fire concern as well as pollution. By including a limit on size, it gives a framework already in place for bonfires which does require coordination with the fire department. They have more than several per year. He can give specific numbers if needed. Councilor Pishioneri spoke regarding burning in barrels and if they issue citations for that. Mr. Hough said a citation would be issued if someone is burning prohibited materials. It is difficult to find evidence once they get the complaint,but if they do find prohibited materials,they issue a citation. They are looking for a way to make it clear that garbage burning is not proper. Councilor Pishioneri said before he can support these changes, he wants to know how big of a problem they are. Mr.Hough said they had 40 complaints for outdoor burning in 2010, 75 complaints in 2011, over 50 in 2012,and over 50 in 2013. Ms.Niehaus said their head enforcement office said almost always when people are burning in barrels, it is prohibited materials. She can pull data on the number of tickets issued for burn barrels. Mr.Hough said recreational fires are allowed as long as they use clean dry firewood and it is not a yellow or red woodstove day. They are not allowed for debris disposal or garbage. They are limited to a3-foot diameter,the same as what is being proposed for ceremonial fires. Mayor Lundberg said the main concern is debris, such as grass,weeds,and garbage. Councilor Ralston said the grass and leaves do create a lot of smoke and can be taken to Rexius or other places instead of burning. Springfield's air quality is well below restrictions so we don't have a problem. People should be cited for burning illegal materials, but not just because it is in barrels.He wouldn't want to change the provision allowing outdoor burning on '/2 acre or larger lots. The urban growth boundary(UGB)twists around and some areas are in the City and others are not. Regarding opacity,there is not much difference between 20%and 40%even if someone is burning correctly. He can understand some of the suggested changes,but not others.Besides prohibiting burning of grass and leaves,he wouldn't change anything. Councilor VanGordon said he would need more information on the ceremonial fires to see what kind of problem it truly is. He also needs data to show why these changes are needed in Springfield.As long as we are far below the standard,there is no need to change. He would want to know how much lower making these changes would put us below the standard. He is fine with grass and leaves prohibitions, but not prohibiting burning on %acres lots. He would need more information to make a decision about some of the other changes. Councilor Moore asked is weed burning with propane torches is allowed. She asked if the air quality could be separated from Eugene on the website. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes March 28,2016 Page 7 Ms.Niehaus said website shows where the air quality is worse in Eugene and Springfield. When you go in further,you can see the monitors by City. Springfield is consistently below, in part due to location and ventilation and landscape. Councilor Moore said would tend to want to look at the 20%opacity because she is not clear the difference. Much of this is education. Councilor Woodrow said she feels good that Springfield is below the standard for a twenty year range. She agrees that the grass clippings and weeds could be prohibited. She is having difficulty understanding what is considered outdoor burning that would be prohibited. Mr.Hough said if someone is cooking food, it is a State exemption,but must be sized appropriately for what you are cooking. That can be an issue with ceremonial fires, mostly where they hold big events.Recreational fires are allowed if it is clean dry firewood on green days. Yard debris cleanup is allowed if the lot is '/2 acre or more. Councilor Woodrow asked if it is collective data that creates the point of penalty for our area. Mr.Hough said when the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) sets air shed boundaries,they start ' from a countywide boundary. Jurisdictions have to argue to make it a smaller area. UGB's around a contiguous area are often a logical boundary, so it is the Eugene and Springfield UGB.Lane County has several air sheds in a single county. They argued for a long time to have the boundary reduced and they went down to an area covering Oakridge and their UGB,plus all of WestFir, even though those are two separate air sheds. If Eugene violates, it has consequences for Springfield because it is the Eugene/Springfield area. Some of the highest levels we have had were in 2013. Once they receive 2016 data,the average is likely to improve. He is optimistic that the next check point will improve. They are confident the Springfield area is going to be fine as long as we continue to pay proper attention. He noted that most of the LRAPA board members are opposed to vehicle inspections. He asked that the Council begin the process to approve the IGA. He will report back to the Advisory Committee with the Council's comments. s Mayor Lundberg said she didn't want to do things that caused more running around of someone to monitor when we don't have that big of a problem. ADJOURNMENT s The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Minutes Recorder—Amy Sowa i Christine L.Lundberg Mayor Attest: sn Amy Sowa City Recorder