HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/15/2006 Regular
.'
.
.
.
City of Springfield
Regular Meeting
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, MAY 15, 2006
The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, May 15,2006 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken
presiding.
ATIENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Ballew, Fitch, Ralston, Lundberg, Woodrow, and
Pishioneri. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Cynthia
Pappas, City Attorney Joe Leahy, Finance Director Bob Duey, City Recorder Amy Sowa and
members of the staff.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Leiken.
SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT
1. Plaque Presentation to Millie Krey.
Police Chief Jerry Smith presented a plaque to Millie Krey for her contributions to the City and
most currently to the Springfield Police Department for the purchase of a new Police Dog. Three
K-9 officers were in attendance with their K-9 partner dogs. Chief Smith noted that one ofthe K-
9 dogs in attendance had served with the Springfield Police Department for seven years and was
responsible for 171 captures during his career. Chief Smith read from the plaque "In
Appreciation for your Generous Donation to the Springfield Police K-9 Unit in Memory of Your
Husband Kenneth". The plaque was signed by the Springfield K-9 Unit, including the four
officers and the supervisor.
2. Volunteer Recognition - Kate Wallace and Steven Dwyer.
Mayor Leiken presented a letter to Kate Wallace who was honored as Volunteer of the Year for
2006 by the United Way of Lane County. He noted the many hours of volunteer work Ms.
Wallace had contributed to the Springfield Public Library as well as other organizations. He
thanked Ms. Wallace for her contributions to our community.
Mayor Leiken presented a letter to Steven Dwyer who was honored as Youth Volunteer of the
Year 2006 by the United Way of Lane County. Mayor Leiken acknowledged Steven's many
volunteer activities and thanked him for his contributions to our community.
3. Recognition of Scott Price for Fifteen Years of Service to the City of Springfield.
City Manager Gino Grimaldi acknowledged Scott Price of the Springfield Fire and Life Safety
Department for his 15 years of service to the City of Springfield. Mr. Grimaldi discussed Scott's
professional background and accomplishments of the last 15 years. Mr. Grimaldi said Scott was
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 2
.
an example of one of the many dedicated City employees and he was proud to have him as a
member of our organization.
4. Recognition of Al Gerard for 15 Years of Service to the City of Springfield.
City Manager Gino Grimaldi acknowledged Al Gerard of the Springfield Fire and Life Safety
Department for his 15 years of service to the City of Springfield. Mr. Grimaldi discussed AI's
professional background and accomplishments over the last 15 years. Al relayed a humorous
story about a Captain working to rescue what he thought was a trapped cat, but turned out to be a
toy kitten that made cat sounds. Mr. Grimaldi noted the many arson cases that the Fire Marshal's
office had been involved in and had helped to solve.
5. Recognition of Ed Black for Thirty Years of Service to the City of Springfield.
City Manager Gino Grimaldi acknowledged Ed Black of the Public Works Maintenance
Department for his 30 years of service to the City of Springfield. Mr. Grimaldi discussed Ed's
professional background and accomplishments over the last 30 years. Mr. Grimaldi relayed
several humorous incidents related to Ed's employment with the City. Mr. Grimaldi said Ed was
a key member of the Springfield team and he looked forward to working with him in the years to
come.
Mayor Leiken said it was great that the City recognized its employees in this way. He recalled
when he fIrst met with Ed Black and the service he had received from Mr. Black over the years.
.
CONSENT CALENDAR
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WITH ITEMS 4.A. AND 5.A.
REMOVED. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
1. Claims
a. Approval of the April 2006, Disbursements for Approval.
2. Minutes
a. April 1 7, 2006 - Work Session
b. April 17, 2006 - Regular Meeting
c. April 24, 2006 - Work Session
3. Resolutions
a. RESOLUTION NO. 06-18 - A RESOLUTION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
P30356: AL~EY PAVING CALVARY TEMPLE.
4. Ordinances
5. Other Routine Matters
.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 3
.
b. Award the Contract to Eugene Sand and Gravel, Inc., in the Amount of$195,712.55 for
Project P20480: Mt. Vernon Street Milling and Overlay, from South 5?th Street East to
the Jasper Road Extension and the Overlay of North 42nd Street from the I-105 Bridge,
North 2,200 Feet, and Vicinity.
c. Initiate the Vacation of the Alley Located Behind the Existing Police Facility to Allow
Construction ofthe Justice Center.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Assistant City Manager Cynthia Pappas read the following ordinance into the record.
4. a. ORDINANCE NO. 6164 - AN ORDINANCE PROHffiITING
OFFENSIVE/INDECENT EXPOSURE IN A PUBLIC PLACE OR VISffiLE FROM A
PUBLIC PLACE.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.1.
5. a. Authorize the City Manager to enter into an Agreement with the Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT) for the City of Springfield to Operate a Temporary Traffic
Signal during the Interstate 5 at Beltline Road Project.
.
Councilor Lundberg said it was unclear where this traffic signal was to be installed. She asked
for clarification on the location.
Traffic Engineer Brian Barnett and Public Works Director Dan Brown brought forward a large
map and noted the location of the signal.
Councilor Pishioneri asked about approaching speeds and if those would be decreased.
Mr. Barnett said he had no information that would indicate a reduction in speed. He said ODOT
would have notified the City if a change were to be made.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO APPROVE ITEM 5.A. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6
FOR AND 0 A.GAINST.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Public Safety November 2006 Special Property Tax Levies.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-19 - A RESOLUTION REFERRING TO THE ELECTORS OF
THE CITY A BALLOT MEASURE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A FIVE YEAR
LOCAL OPTION TAX FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PURPOSES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1.09
OF ASSESSED VALUE BEGINNING 2008/09.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-20 - A RESOLUTION REFERRING TO THE ELECTORS OF
THE CITY A BALLOT MEASURE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A FOUR YEAR
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 4
.
LOCAL OPTION TAX FOR FIRE SERVICE PURPOSES IN THE AMOUNT OF $0.40 OF
ASSESSED VALUE BEGINNING 2007/08.
Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. At the April 17 Council
meeting, Councilors Fitch and Lundberg volunteered to work with staffto develop additional
options for securing funding for jail operations. The purpose was to review the progress that had
been made to date on identifying a preferred alternative for securing jail operations funding and
to provide suggestions to Council on how to proceed with finding a preferred alternative. A
recommendation has been prepared and will be presented at the May 15 work session.
Mr. Duey discussed the two levies. He said the fIrst levy, A Five Year Local Option Tax for
Public Safety, included two parts. The fIrst was to renew the Police levy passed in November
2002, which was in affect from July 1, 2003 and was scheduled to expire June 30, 2007. The.
second part was to fund jail operations at the new Justice Center. He discussed some of the other
funding options Council had considered before putting out this measure. The new proposed
Police levy would be to close the gap in funding needed. He explained the other funding sources
such as jail bed leasing, citation fees and court fmes. He said it would be a five-year levy, with a
delayed effective date and would run from July 1,2008 through June 30, 2013. He said the
revised ballot title was before Council and had been reviewed by the Secretary of State's office.
He discussed the amounts for each levy.
.
Mr. Duey said part of the funding package for jail operations had been consideration of a
Business License. The public hearing on that item had been held open from the April 17, 2006
meeting and would be continued tonight. He said indications from Council during the work
session were that the Business License would not be part of the jail funding package.
Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing.
1. Mike Donnelly. Springfield Board of Directors. Springfield Chamber of Commerce. 1315
Aspen. Springfield. OR Mr. Donnelly reaffIrmed the strong support of the Chamber for the
levy in the interest in the continued positive growth for strong economic development in our
community. In addition, the Chamber would provide support in time, energy and resources
from the Board and members of the business community represented by the Springfield
Chamber of Commerce.
2. Dan Egan. Springfield Chamber of Commerce. 850 North 6th Street. Springfield. OR Mr.
Egan said he appreciated work from the Council and citizens who had looked into the
options. Operations was a stumbling block in this issue. The Chamber of Commerce had
always been supportive of the jail issue and would continue to be supportive. It was
important not only for the residents, but also the businesses. He said they wanted the levy to
pass and were willing to pledge $10,000 to the Political Action Committee (PAC) that would
be formed, as well as fifty to one hundred volunteers. He said it gave the citizens an
opportunity to speak once more about the importance of safety in Springfield.
3. Curtiss Greer. 357 55th Street. Springfield, OR Mr. Greer said that until he saw some effort to
lower the cost in building and staffing the jail, which he felt could be done, he would oppose
this or any measure.
.
4. Fred Simmons. 312 South 52nd Place. Springfield. OR Mr. Simmons said the Committee that
dealt with the issue for funding felt that the first best option was to get money from those that
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 5
.
occupied the jail. The Business Licensefee then came up, but was apparently not going
forward. He said the Committee had talked about ten or twelve cents per thousand, but it was
now being proposed at nearly thirty-five cents per thousand. He said he thought it was
important to allow the people to vote on the issue. He said he strongly supported the Fire
levy and the portion of the Police levy that was reasonable for the Police Department. With
the Police and Jail funding combined, he would have to consider whether he could support it
or not. He said it was wise to get started early to get the information out to the public. He
asked that the City clearly identify advocacy, education and staff involvement in dollars
because if there was advocacy and public money spent, that would be questioned.
.
5. Roy Varm. 6862 Glacier Drive, Springfield. OR Mr. Varin said Springfield needed a jail
with our growing population. He said he was tired of the catch and release program at the
County jail. He suggested making the inmates pay for the last quarter of their stay to help
reduce costs. He said he had children in college and he noted the cost of room and board.
The City could assess the prisoners those costs as well. He said there would be transitional
costs to get the inmates back into society. He noted set up costs when children moved out on
their own. He said the Springfield Economic Development Agency (SEDA) was trying to get
businesses to come to our community. He said if it took $4M to run the jail, the City should
spend $40,000 on economic assistance on a PETE (pursue excellence through education)
scholarship to help graduates transition to college. He said most kids going to college were
from the upper twenty-five percentile and this could help level the playing field. He said he
would be willing to donate toward such a scholarship and noted that other businesses in the
community would probably be willing to contribute. He said if businesses knew Springfield
offered scholarships to students, it could bring in more businesses. It would be a better
option than paying infrastructure costs, etc. to bring in these businesses.
6. Roxie Cuellar. 739 South 70th Street, Springfield. OR Ms. Cuellar welcomed Mr. Grimaldi
back. She said if the City had planned to totally fund the jail through a levy, she would not
have been supportive. She said the reality was that there was just a small gap to close and she
would support using a levy to fill that gap. That would give the City time to fmd other ways
to fund operations ofthe jail. She also supported the levy because the major portion was the
Police levy and she was very supportive of that. She urged Council to support both the Police
and Fire levies and she hoped Council would support putting them both on the ballot.
7. Gery VanderMeer. 2604 J Street. Springfield. OR Mr. VanderMeer said he would be glad to
see the Business License gone. He said the jail was important to Springfield and with the
problems Lane County was having it could be even more beneficial. He said he also
supported fiscal responsibility on the part of the City. He said new revenues would be
coming into the City under proposal Number 6 that would raise fines, fees and penalties. He
said there had been no discussion about the additional revenue that would be generated from
these increases. He said this revenue should be dedicated toward the funding of the operation
of the jail. It could eliminate the need for the thirty-four cent portion of the levy to be
dedicated to the Jail, reduce the amount of the levy to the voters, and increase the probability
of its passage. He discussed the $1.2M that had been discussed for jail operations and that
not one nickel had been identified from the elimination of failure to appear that could be
dedicated to funding of the jail. He said these things should be considered to be fiscally
responsible to the citizens. He asked Councii to consider these things.
.
Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 6
.
Councilor Fitch said in a perfect world there would be a perfect answer. This was a fIrst step.
She noted the importance of public safety and said the Council was looking at a way to utilize the
different fees and fines that would be enacted tonight. The thirty-four cents was to fill the gap
that remained along with the seventy-six cents to renew the Police levy. The two together would
allow the City to have the public safety that was needed and the citizens had asked for. She said
Council would be putting this out to the voters to make the fmal decision. She said the Jail would
not be built without the identification of that stop gap funding. In order to do groundbreaking for
the Jail in November, the vote of the people was needed. She said the Police and the Jail had to
be tied together. The Police levy did what they initially asked by increasing the officers on the
street, reduced response time and increased arrests. Just arresting people did not send enough of a
message, there needed to be a deterrent. The citizens had told the Council this was important,
Council believed it was important and that was why they had spent so much time looking into this
issue. Council wanted to put it out now to give citizens time to study the issues, look at the
revenue sources and to give the citizens all the information they needed to hopefully support
these levies.
.
Councilor Woodrow thanked Councilor Lundberg and Councilor Fitch for their work on this. He
said they had looked ~t using court revenues, booking and jail bed charges, a telephone contract,
cancellation of the current contract with Lane County, leasing out jail beds and a surcharge
imposed upon citations as well as the prisoners themselves. He said the Failure to Appear (FT A)
money was not real money, but was money that the City paid to the police officers in their normal
process of work. It was not a savings, but would allow them to fulfill their jobs better than they
can do now. He said he was previously prepared to support a Business License, but would not go
forward on that. He said he was fully supportive of the levy, and acknowledged that it wasn't the
perfect solution. Hopefully, with the additional taxes that would come on line in the future, this
levy may not need to be renewed. He appreciated all the work that had been done and would be
supportive.
Councilor Lundberg said they chose to put this resolution out early to give ample time for
campaigning. As Councilors, they were in a position to advocate and she encouraged anyone and
everyone that was willing to help to participate as soon as possible.
Councilor Pishioneri said he agreed. He said he was familiar with this type of facility and that the
estimates were conservative for this type of facility. He said it was important to go to the citizens
and allow them to make the decision. He said he was supportive of this. If it were to pass, there
would still be a lot of work to do. He said this was the best way for the City and the best way for
the citizens. He said he appreciated the work that went into this.
.
Mayor Leiken thanked those that worked so hard on the Task Force that met to come up with the
many options. The Task Force brought forth many options for Council to consider and a
Business License was considered. He said these options energized the debate and conversations
to get us to this point. He said that was democracy at its best. He said this was one of the most
important votes this Council would have and would be a very important vote for the public. He
discussed the cuts to counties that would be reflected in decreased funding for public safety and
enforcement, making Springfield's Jail even more important than ever. He said this was crucial.
He said he was proud of Springfield and its residents because we didn't just let things happen, but
took care of business. He said there were times we had to solve an issue on our own and we had
come to that point with this issue. He said he hoped the citizens would see that. It would be a
close vote because people didn't want their taxes increased, but there weren't many choices. He
said he would advocate for this levy because he strongly believed it was such an important issue
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 7
.
that Springfield needed to address. He said he appreciated Councilors Lundberg and Fitch and
the citizens on the Task Force. They energized this debate and their work got us to this point.
Councilor Ralston said he originally wanted to tie the police levy and jail operations together. He
felt Council had done their due diligence and this was the best option. He said he was pleased
Council came back to this as the best solution.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 06-19. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 06-20. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
2. Business License Program.
ORDINANCE NO.2 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL
CODE TO IMPOSE A FEE AND TAX UPON THE PRIVILEGE OF DOING BUSINESS
WITHIN THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD. ADDING NEW SECTIONS 7.000 THROUGH
7.038. REGARDING THE LICENSING AND TAXATION OF BUSINESSES;
AMENDING SECTIONS 7.000 THROUGH 7.808 ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE LICENSING AND REGULATION OF CERTAIN BUSINESS ACTIVITIES.
.
Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. The City Council held a first
reading and public hearing of an ordinance for a Business License Program on February 21 st. A
second reading and public hearing was held on March 06, and the hearing has remained open for
the March 20 and the April 17 Council meeting to allow for a continuing dialogue on this topic
with the Springfield Chamber. ..
At their April 17 meeting, the Council continued a public hearing on an ordinance for possible
changes to the City's Business License Program. The hearing was held open until that evening
while the Chamber and the City staff discussed with the Springfield Utility Board the possibility
of that agency serving as.the billing agent for a surcharge on electricity customers within
Springfield. The intent was to use any revenue generated from this activity as a source of
dedicated funding for the planned jail facility. It was detenp.ined that this was not a viable option.
Direction from the Council that evening was to hold the public hearing open until May 15 and for
staff to return at that time with a fully completed ordinance for Council's consideration.
The City Attorney's office and staff have completed their review and are submitting the attached
ordinance for your review and consideration.
Mayor Leiken continued the public hearing.
.
1. Fred Simmons. 312 South 52nd Place. Springfield. OR Mr. Simmons said it looked like this
was going down anyway. He said while the City had been offered funding and volunteers
from Chamber, thirty to fifty percent of property crimes would be against businesses. He said
he felt from the beginning that a mechanism to monitor businesses was valid. He hoped
Council would consider that at some point. If Council was not going to consider this as a
mechanism for funding, that was their privilege. The issue would have been well served by
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 8
.
having those resources going towards the jail. The critical issue was to get the Jail fund put
together and start collecting the fees and putting them in the bank, drawing interest. There
would be costs not already estimated in the operational process.
Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing.
Councilor Ballew said there was opposition to a Business License tax, but perhaps not a fee that
would make a directory of businesses within the City to give the City a better opportunity to
know who was there and to help regulate. She said a Citizen Advisory Committee would be
worthwhile to look further into this, including business people, workers and everyday citizens.
The fee could be just to pay for the cost of issuing a Business License.
Councilor Fitch clarified that such a committee would be a short-term committee. She said she
would also support such a committee to look at the issues and ascertain from the information the
benefit from it and what the City needed.
Councilor Pishioneri said a committee was a good idea.' He said he would like to see what kind
of parameters or standards and which businesses could operate in the City.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO NOT ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.2. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
.
3. Proposed Resolution Setting Local and Regional Wastewater User Fees and Local Drainage
User Fees.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-21- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
COMMON COUNCIL SETTING LOCAL AND REGIONAL SEWER USER FEES AS
SET FORTH IN THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE.
Ravi Brooksbank from Environmental Services presented the staff report on this item. Each year,
staff brings to Council proposed user rates for local wastewater and drainage programs. These
rates are established to provide adequate revenue to fund operation and maintenance (O&M) and
a portion of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) at the City of Springfield. In addition to
these rates, the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) develops user
rates necessary to maintain the Regional Wastewater Program (RWP).
Last year, as part of the F:Y 05-06 budget development, Council was presented with several local
user rate options. The approach ultimately taken by the Council (beginning with the FY 05-06
fiscal year) was to approve a two year phasing plan for user rate increases in an effort to collect
adequate revenues for unmet capital needs, and simultaneously mitigate the likelihood of a large
rate spike. This involved a local wastewater and drainage user rate increase of approximately 7
percent per year over a two year period.
.
At the Council's May 1 sl work session, staff presented proposed local wastewater and drainage
user rate increases that were consistent with the aforementioned course of action and discussed
their impact on the FY 06-07 budget. In addition, staff informed Council that MWMC conducted
a public hearing and adopted a 10 percent rate increase at their April 20th meeting. The Council
discussed the proposed rates and gave no direction to change the rate schedule that will be
brought to the public hearing. Therefore, the attached resolution and rate schedule (Exhibit A
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 9
.
included in the agenda packet) are substantively the same as what was presented in the work
session. Both local and regional wastewater fees and local drainage fees are anticipated to be
effective on July 1,2006, pending adoption of the attached resolution.
Ms. Brooksbank discussed the increases approved by the MWMC. She discussed the average
increase per household. No public comment was received at the MWMC public hearing and the
MWMC adopted the user rate schedule reflecting a ten percent increase.
Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing.
No one appeared to speak.
Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 06-21. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
4. Liquor License Endorsements for the Renewal Period of 2006-2007.
.
Community Services Manager Dave Puent presented the staff report on this item. On December
19, 1994, Council approved Ordinance No. 5768 that established specific criteria to be used when
reviewing an application for a liquor license endorsement. Council may recommend denial based
upon reliable, factual information as it relates to any of the criteria listed in Section 7.302 of the
Springfield Municipal Code.
Some of the required information for liquor license renewal, i.e., ownership of the establishment,
cannot be determined until staff receives the actual application. However, some determination
about meeting the listed criteria can be made now since the criteria relates to the level of police
activity associated with the establishment.
The public hearing this evening is scheduled for Council to receive community testimony relative
to the liquor license renewal endorsement. At the conclusion of the public hearing, Council is
requested to provide one of the following recommendations to the Oregon Liquor Control
Commission for the licens~ renewal of the listed establishments (see agenda packet for this
meeting): 1. Grant; 2. No Recommendation; 3. Do Not Grant Unless (applicant demonstrates
commitment to overcome listed concerns); or 4. Deny.
Councilor Ballew said she was surprised at the number of warrants that were served on these
calls.
Chief Smith said when they responded to calls they ran checks on everyone involved.
Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing.
No one appeared to speak.
.
Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 10
.
Councilor Pishioneri discussed concerns about the businesses that had the highest number of
calls. He noted Club 420. He said he didn't know if he could concur with a recommendation to
go forward with their renewal.
Mr. Leahysaid they could approve/deny or put conditions on approval. He said the Council
could only make a recommendation because the Oregon Liquor License Commission (OLCC)
made the final decision. He referred to Section 7.302 of the Springfield Code, which identified
Council action related to criteria. He said that was the same criteria that OLCC had. If there
were one or two businesses that Council did not want to recommend approval, their denial would
hold greater weight if it was tied to the criteria along with information.
Councilor Pishioneri referred to a memorandum that suggested that if the activity continued to
occur it could cause extraordinary services from the Police Department.
Chief Smith explained what was referred to in the memorandum. He said he did not see the 53
calls for service unnecessarily extreme. He referred to other establishments in the past that had
extremely high instances. Many of those businesses went out of business.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if the Council could send something to the OLCC with comments
citing concerns about the two businesses. He asked if OLCC could then issue warnings to those
businesses.
.
Chief Smith said the problem he could see regarding the 7-11 Store was that it was difficult to
know whether or not the calls were triggered by the establishment because it was a congregation
point. The same was true at Club 420.
Councilor Pishioneri said it could prompt the business to hire security.
Councilor Lundberg noted the number of liquor licenses that had been reviewed over the years,
some with extremely high numbers in the six hundreds in terms of calls. She said a program was
set up to do some monitoring of that business and that establishment was no longer in business.
She said OLCC was good about trying to keep things under control, but it was only under
extraordinary circumstances that OLCC would deny a license. She said the City was limited in
what it could or couldn't do. She agreed with Chief Smith that the incident may not necessarily
be in the building, but in the proximity and the establishment was used to make the call. She said
she was not seeing any red flags about the businesses. She said there was a situation downtown
that needed to be addressed.
Councilor Ralston said the numbers did not cause alarm as some had in the past. He said with the
number of people coming and going to these establishments, the numbers were not enough to
cause him to remove them from the list.
Councilor Pishioneri said he was not suggesting taking away their license, but he wanted to have
a message sent to them that the City was aware of their increased activity. He would like to see if
there was any way those businesses could receive that message.
.
Councilor Fitch said there was the potential that the Police Chief could relay to those businesses
that there was a lengthy discussion by Council on this issue and it would not be advantageous for
a business to be listed as the top three on this list next year.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 11
.
Councilor Pishioneri said that would be fine if the Chief was willing to relay that message.
Chief Smith said he would communicate that information to the establishments noted. He said
one concern he had in doing that was that people might quit calling when there was a need for
police response. He said the business needed to understand that it didn't mean for them not to
call, but to mitigate the problem.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO APPROVE LIQUOR LICENSE ENDORSEMENTS FOR THE
RENEWAL PERIOD OF 2006-2007. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR
AND 0 AGAINST.
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
I. Curtiss Greer, 357 South 57th Place. Springfield. OR Mr. Greer referred to Ordinance No. 10
listed in the agenda packet. He said the ordinance did not address many things about firearms
that he was familiar with. He said the way he read it, a person would not have probable cause
to stop someone even though they had a loaded firearm. He said the ordinance was written as
if the weapon were unloaded. He said the City needed someone working with these
ordinances that was familiar with firearms and the terminology and not change the definition
of a word from one paragraph to the next.
.
2. Fred Simmons. 312 South 52nd Place. Springfield. OR Mr. Simmons thanked Matt Cox from
the City Attorney's office for his work on these many ordinances and making the corrections.
He discussed the loaded firearm question, which was actually Ordinance No. 11. He
discussed the definition of a loaded firearm as noted in the ordinance. He gave an example of
a police officer approaching someone with a weapon, not knowing if it was loaded or
unloaded, and the difficulty that could present. He discussed different firearms and what
would be considered loaded or unloaded. He said the average officer would be advised to
proceed carefully, but he hoped that the unintended consequence was not to have an officer
wounded in the line of duty. He said it was a challenge for the writer of the ordinance, but
more of a challenge for the officer in the field to determine if the weapon was loaded. He
suggested revisiting this ordinance. He,said he did not want police officers injured or killed.
Mr. Cox said the City Attorney's office dealt with the loaded weapon issue in Ordinance No.3.
He read that definition. He said that was the standard the police officers would use in the field.
He said an officer did not need probable cause to stop someone, but rather reasonable suspicion,
which could be just seeing a gun. It gave the offtcer the opportunity to approach the person in
question. He said they had talked this over with counsel and the police, and it was a difficult
ordinance. The City was only allowed to regulate the possession of loaded firearms. He said if
citizens saw someone with a gun in the park, they should leave. The City was bound by ORS
166.173.
.
3. Shirley Gauthier. 538 West M Street. Springfield. OR. Ms. Gauthier thanked the Mayor and
Council for considering her language changes in the nudity ordinance which Council voted to
support tonight. She said she had not approached Council often in the past. She said she had
sent two emails to the Mayor and Council and had only received one response back. She
encouraged Council to reply to those who send emails. She discussed the commitment of the
citizens who took on these issues and said she hoped Council would reply to emailjust to say.
they got the email so the citizen knew they had been heard.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 12
.
4. Deanna Martin. 176 South 69th Place. Springfield. OR Ms. Martin said she lived in east
Springfield and said there was no safe place to ride bikes or go on long walks. She said she
talked to the transportation department to see what it would take to make something like this
happen. She said she spoke with Kristi Krueger who explained there was a plan in process.
Ms. Martin visited the City's webpage to do some research and it appeared the 420d Street
bikepath was the last thing that was done. She asked what she could do to get a path from
Highbanks to 420d Street. She noted the great connectivity throughout the City if that could
be done. She noted the dangers of riding down Main Street or along the highway. She asked
what she could to get this going. She said if it was funding, she had experience in fund
raising. She suggested using volunteers, such as Boy Scouts and high school groups.
Mayor Leiken said he would have Public Works Director Dan Brown contact her or have
someone from transportation talk to her more about this. He said the plan in place was a twenty-
year plan. He liked the suggestions Ms. Martin had brought forward.
Councilor Fitch said partnerships were great and sometimes it just took a champion to make
things happen. She encouraged Ms. Martin to keep pursuing it.
Councilor Pishioneri also suggested contacting Bob Keefer at Willamalane.
.
5. Roxie Cuellar. HomeBuilders Association (HBA), 2053 Laura Street. Springfield. OR Ms.
Cuellar said the HBA would pledge $17,000 - $20,000, depending on what equaled half of
the demand side of the Residential Lands Study if it went forward. She said the HBA
appreciated that the City was willing to look at the land supply. She had talked to
Development Services Director Bill Grile, Mayor Leiken and HBA members. She said the
study would probably cost about $35,000 and the HBA would pledge up to $20,000. Ifhalf
of the cost was more than that, she would try to raise additional funding. She said she was
concerned about whether or not Springfield was actually doing a land study because she had
heard they might not do a study, but rather just look at the criteria. She needed to know if
Springfield was actually going forward with a lands study and asked for confrrmation. Part
of the pressure for Eugene to do a study was that Springfield was taking a leadership role in
this.
Mr. Leahy recommended Council not speak on this tonight, but give staff an opportunity to
discuss. The matter was brought up and there were confrrmations, but an issue was raised and the
City was in litigation. He said a commitment needed to be made carefully. There had been issues
that needed to be agreed upon.
Councilor Fitch asked if this would be coming back to Council soon.
Mr. Leahy said he and Meg Kieran would meet with the City Manager and make a
recommendation to bring to Council for their decision.
Ms. Cuellar said the sooner they could know for sure the better in order to raise the funds.
COUNCIL RESPONSE
.
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
.
..
.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 13
1. Correspondence from Stefano Viggiano, LTD Director of Development Services, P.O. Box
7070, Eugene, OR Thanking Council for their Approval to Proceed to the Next Step of the
Pioneer Parkway EmX Project Development.
2. Correspondence from Buck Biggs, Best Cash, 1840 Main Street, Springfield, OR Regarding
Electronic Data Reporting.
3. Correspondence from Bill Dwyer, Chair, Lane County Board of Commissioners, 125 East 8th
Avenue, Eugene, OR Regarding Lane Metro Partnership.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO ACCEPT THE CORRESPONDENCE FOR FILING. THE MOTION
. PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
BIDS
ORDINANCES
I. Amendments to Springfield Municipal Code, Section 5, Public Protection, Section 1.205
General Penalties.
Matt Cox from the City Attorney's Office presented the staff report on this item. The City
Attorney's office, at the. request of the Springfield City Council following the public reading of
the proposed ordinances at the City Council meeting on May 1, 2006, has made revisions to the
ordinances. The revisions are in accordance with the instructions of the City Council and take
into consideration comments from the public and Springfield Police.
ORDINANCE NO. 6165 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD
MUNICIPAL CODE (SMC) SECTION 5. PUBLIC PROTECTION. TO ADOPT BY
REFERENCE PORTIONS OF OREGON REVISED STATUTES (ORS CHAPTER 153)
THEREBY ADOPTING STATE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES FOR VIOLATIONS.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6165. THE MOTION
PASSSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ORDINANCE NO. 6166 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5.104
"MISDEMEANORS AND VIOLATIONS - STATE STATUTES ADOPTED" OF THE
SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE (SMC) TO ADOPT BY REFERENCE. OREGON
REVISED STATUTES (ORS) CHAPTER 181 THEREBY ADOPTING STATE ORS
CRIMINAL STATUTES.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6166. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ORDINANCE NO. 6167 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 5.058
"DISORDERLY CONDUCT" AND 5.059 "HARASSMENT" OF CHAPTER 5 OF THE
SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE (SMC) TO DELETE THE SMC LANGUAGE
REGARDING THESE SECTIONS AND ADOPT THE OREGON REVISED STATUTES
(ORS) REGARDING THESE CRIMES; DELETING FROM SECTION 5.604 ANY
REFERENCE TO DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND HARASSMENT AS CIVIL
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 14
.
INFRACTIONS: AND AMENDING SECTION 5.118 "FIREARMS" TO LIST
UNLAWFUL DISCHARGE OF A DANGEROUS WEAPON AS AN A OR C
MISDEMEANOR:
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6167. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ORDINANCE NO. 6168 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5.624 "SCHEDULE
OF FORFEITURES" AND SPECIFICALLY SECTION 5.624(4) OF THE SPRINGFIELD
MUNICIPAL CODE CHANGING THE ASSESSMENT OF A FORFEITURE FOR A
CIVIL INFRACTION FROM NOT EXCEEDING $250 TO NOT EXCEEDING $1.000
FOR CLASS 1 CIVIL INFRACTIONS AND FROM NOT EXCEEDING $150 TO NOT'
EXCEEDING $500 FOR CLASS 2 CIVIL INFRACTIONS:
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6168. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ORDINANCE NO. 6169 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5. PUBLIC
PROTECTION OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE TO CLEARLY
DESIGNATE ALL NONCRIMINAL OFFENSES AS EITHER VIOLATIONS OR CIVIL
INFRACTIONS:
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6169. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ORDINANCE NO. 6170 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1.205 "GENERAL
PENALTIES" OF CHAPTER I OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT
THE OREGON REVISED STATUTES (ORS) IN REGARDS TO CRIMES AND
PUNISHMENTS. SPECIFICALLY "JAlL TERMS FOR MISDEMEANORS" AND ORS
"FINES FOR MISDEMEANORS" AND REVISING THE FINE FROM NOT EXCEEDING
$500 TO NOT EXCEEDING $720 FOR NON-CRIMINAL OFFENSE OR VIOLATION OF
THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE OR ANY OTHER CITY ORDINANCE:
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6170. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ORDINANCE NO. 6171 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6. VEHICLES
AND TRAFFIC. DELETING SECTION 6.070 AND ADDING SECTION 6.560 OF THE
SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE PENALTY
SECTION OF CHAPTER 6 APPLIES TO THE ENTIRE CHAPTER 6: and.
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6171. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 15
.
ORDINANCE NO. 6172 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5.418 "GENERAL
REGULATIONS." "CONTROL OF DOGS AND OTHER ANIMALS." SECTION 5.448
"KILLING AND CHASING OF LIVESTOCK," SECTION 5.450 "DANGEROUS
ANIMALS." SECTION 5.456 "VICIOUS DOGS." SECTION 5.460 "CRUELTY TO DOGS
OR OTHER ANIMALS. SECTION 5.462 "POISON," AND SECTION 5.472 "RESISTING
AN ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER." TO CLEARLY DESIGNATE
CERTAIN OFFENSES AS CLASS C MISDEMEANORS.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6172. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
2. Amending Springfield Municipal Code (SMC), Specifically SMC 5.286, "Possession of
Firearms Prohibited".
ORDINANCE NO. 6173 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD
MUNICIPAL CODE (SMC) SECTION 5. PUBLIC PROTECTION. SPECIFICALLY SMC
5.286. "POSSESSION OF FIREARMS PROHIBITED," BY DELETING A PORTION OF
SMC 5.286. AND ADDING "LOADED" TO THE CAPTION TO BRING THIS SECTION
OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW
AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
.
Ordinance Enactment and Effective Date: In the event an ordinance contains an emergency clause, the
ordinance shall become op~rative immediately upon passage by the council by a two-thirds majority of all
members of the council. Ordinances not containing an emergency clause shall not take effect until 30 days after
its passage.
Matt Cox from the City Attorney's Office presented the staff report on this item. When drafting 8
ordinances amending the Springfield Municipal Code (SMC), Section 5, Public Protection,
Section 1.205 General Penalties, the City Attorney's office found an error in SMC 5.286
regarding - Possession of Firearms Prohibited. This error was brought to the attention of Council
during their May 1, 2006 public hearing.
A new ordinance has been drafted amending SMC 5.286 at the direction of the Council and
public comment. Attached is a draft copy of the newly drafted ordinance. Thereby, Section
5.286 - Possession of Firearms Prohibited will be amended to only apply to "loaded" firearms.
To have this ordinance adopted in conjunction with the 8 ordinances amending SMC Section 5,
Public Protection, it has been written with an emergency clause.
There would be no negative financial impact to the city.
Councilor Ralston noted his strong support for concealed weapons holders. He said in reading
the ordinance, it sounded like a person could be carrying a gun without bullets in it and still have
bullets in their pocket. That was correct. He said he was in support of this ordinance.
Mr. Leahy reminded Council that this ordinance related to a public place or park.
.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 16
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6173. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL
I. Business from Council.
Mayor Leiken presented a resolution recognizing Cynthia Pappas for service to the City of
Springfield as Interim City Manager from December 6, 2005 through April 30, 2006. The Mayor
read the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 06-22 - A RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING CYNTHIA P APP AS FOR
SERVICE TO THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD AS INTERIM CITY MANAGER FROM
DECEMBER 6, 2005 THROUGH APRIL 30. 2006.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 06-22. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
Mayor Leiken presented Ms. Pappas with a bouquet of roses from the Mayor and Council.
.
Ms. Pappas said it was her pleasure to serve and she had a great time. She thanked the Mayor and
Council.
a. Committee Reports
1. Mayor Leiken reported on the I-5/Beltline Groundbreaking Ceremony which took
place earlier in the morning. Governor Kulongoski and Congressman Peter DeFazio
attended this event. This project had been a great partnership and Councilor
Lundberg's dedication to the I-5/Beltline Decision Team helped make it possible. He
said it provided a great opportunity for Congressman DeFazio to take the project idea
back to Washington DC. He also thanked Lane County Commissioner Bobby Green
for his important part in this project. He said he was glad the Governor recognized
that as well as the aTIA III funding, there would be hundreds of people working on
this project at family wages. He said this flyover was going to be thirty percent
larger than the one at Highway 217. He again thanked Councilor Lundberg for her
service and leadership on this project. He said there was a lot of energy at the event
and he thanked all who attended.
2. Councilor Pishioneri discussed the McKenzie Watershed Council and the potential
loss of funding through the Bonneville Power Administration (BP A). The City sent
some letters off to the appropriate senators and congressman regarding that issue.
.
Councilor Pishioneri reported on the Jail Policy Committee. He said they had been
meeting and going over many ordinances that related to how officers would be
handling violations. He said they had been working hard on that issue. He said they
would be meeting tomorrow to discuss the Jail Program and architectural design
issues. He said there had been a lot of work from the Courts on this and it was very
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 17
.
much appreciated. He said due to changes in some of the State statutes, some City
ordinances needed to be corrected to reflect those changes.
Councilor Pishioneri noted that today was National Peace Officers Memorial Day.
He said in 1962, President Kennedy declared through an act of congress that May 15
of each year be honored for police officers who gave the ultimate sacrifice. He said
he was honored to be part of that event and he appreciated those councilors who were
able to attend. He said it was an important thing to honor.
Mayor Leiken said Springfield hosted the National Peace Officers Memorial Day
event and Frank Carpenter did a great job emceeing. He asked Chief Smith to relay
that to Mr. Carpenter. He said it was very moving and he appreciated the service of
police officers.
3. Mayor Leiken said he had been invited to attend a Trade Mission to Japan and South
Korea with the Governor and a delegation next month. He said it was a great honor,
but he wanted to get approval from Council as he would be representing the Council.
He said there could be some great opportunities for the community.
Council was very supportive.
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY
COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO RESOLVE THAT SID LEIKEN, MAYOR, BE
AUTHORIZED AS THE CITY'S OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE
GOVERNORS TRADE MISSION TO JAPAN AND SOUTH KOREA. THE
MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
1. Council Initiation of an Amendment to the Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram,
Glenwood Refmement Plan Diagram, and Concurrent Rezoning.
Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. This property has been in
the continuous ownership of Mr. Macauley since 1974. During this period Mr. Macauley was
never approached by a public entity with an offer to purchase the land for public purpose even
though a government action (Metro Plan and refmement plan adoption) resulted in the land being
changed from Industrial to Park and Open Space.
As the attached Council Briefing memorandum describes, the Public Land and Open Space
(PLO) land use designation is intended to identify lands primarily in public ownership, most
commonly park lands. Past Councils limited this designation and implementing zoning to land
publicly owned, if not always exclusively park use. As recently as 2002, the Council re-
designated property in Gateway from PLO to Campus Industrial (CI) and at 32nd Street from LMI
to PLO when ownership changed from public to private (gateway) and private to public (32nd
Street). Other than cemeteries, which are infrequently listed as needed commercial opportunity
sites in our inventories, there really aren't any permitted uses in the PLO zone that would
generate revenue for the property owner.
.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 18
.
Initiation of this action by Council would result in a joint hearing of the Springfield and Lane
County Planning Commissions followed by a joint hearing of the City Council and Board of
Commissioners because the property lies between the city limits and the urban growth boundary.
Ms. Pappas noted a memo from Mr. Mott related to this issue that had been put at the Mayor and
Council places.
Mr. Mott said the original request was to initiate rezoning of just the one property. He referred to
a map posted on the wall that designated four other properties surrounding the McCauley
property that had come to staffs attention that had received this same zoning. He said those
properties were all privately owned. Staff had tried to contact all the property owners in that area
and had contacted two of them who also wanted to re-designate their properties to LMI.
Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners would have to act on
initiation of any change. He said Council would receive staff reports and findings regarding these
properties when it was brought back as a Metro Plan amendment. He did note, however, that it
was very rare for private property owners to have property designated public land and open space.
He said the only circumstance he knew of in Springfield was the cemetery. All other land that
was zoned public land and open space was owned by a government entity or quasi-governmental
agency.
Councilor Ballew said a couple of the emails stated that they wanted to maintain Low Density
Residential (LDR).
.
Mr. Mott discussed each of the properties and how they were zoned. A couple of the properties
had been designated LDR because they each had a house on them. He said Council could
establish any type of trigger to implement the plan designation. When the jurisdictional transfer
of Glenwood occurred, the Council and Board of Commissioners worked out an arrangement to
allow certain activities to continue as long as the property owners wanted those activities to
continue. What would change that to be in compliance with the plan would be annexation and
development consistent with the Plan. He said Council could allow the use to continue on these
properties under the current zoning, but require upon annexation or extension of services that the
property would be rezoned to LMI. '
Councilor Ballew asked if the properties were in the City. No. She confirmed that the City had
assumed the duty for zoning those properties. She asked if we would go to a Metro Plan change
that would be financed by the City.
Mr. Mott said that was correct. He said part ofthis was in response to the fact that no private
property owner would actively solicit park and open space designation and BM37 claims could be
made. The property owner would prefer to get the zoning back that was there when he purchased
the property. The other property owners wanted the same thing. He said there was no other
suitable designation for this property. He explained.
Councilor Fitch said it sounded like a good compromise.
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WOODROW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO MOVE TO INITIATE A METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN
DIAGRAM AMENDMENT TO REDESIGNATE THE FOLLOWING PROPERTY
FROM PARK AND OPEN SPACE TO LIGHT MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL: TAX LOTS 200,
ASSESSOR'S MAP 18-03-10-10, TAX LOT 1000, ASSESSOR'S MAP 18-03-03-14, TAX
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 15,2006
Page 19
.
LOTS 300,700,800 and 900, ASSESSOR'S MAP 18-03-03-4. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT
THIS MOTION INCLUDES THE INITIATION OF IDENTICAL AND CONCURRENT
AMENDMENTS TO THE GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN DIAGRAM FOR THESE
PROPERTIES AND THE REZONING OF TAX LOTS 300 AND 700 FROM PUBLIC
LAND AND OPEN SPACE TO LIGHT MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m.
Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa
Attest:
~5Wa..
City Rec er .
.
.