HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-11-15 SEDA Meeting Minutes MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
SPRINGFIELD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD MONDAY,NOVEMBER 15,2004
The Springfield Economic Development Agency met in the Council Meeting Room,225 Fifth
Street, Springfield,Oregon,on Monday,November 15,2004 at 7:15 p.m.,with Board Chair
Tammy Fitch calling the meeting to order.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Board Chair Tammy Fitch and Board Members Sid Leiken,Anne Ballew,Dave
Ralston,Christine Lundberg,John Woodrow,and Joe Pishioneri. Also present were City
Manager Mike Kelly,Assistant City Manager Cynthia Pappas,Economic Development Manager
John Tamulonis and City Recorder Amy Sowa.
APPROVAL MINUTES
a. Minutes of November 8,2004
IT WAS MOVED BY BOARD MEMBER BALLEW WITH A SECOND BY BOARD
MEMBER RALSTON TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 8,2004 SEDA MINUTES. THE
MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST AND 1 ABSTENTION
(Pishioneri).
COMMUNICATIONS
1. Business from the Audience
d. Dave Carvo,4010 East 16th, Eugene, OR. Mr. Carvo is the Chair of the Glenwood
Water District. As the major taxing district being affected by this,he felt it would be fair
for a member of the Glenwood Water District to be a part of the SEDA Board. A major
portion of their taxes will be used for the urban renewal and this would be a good time to
join a partnership with the SEDA Board and the Glenwood Water District. He feels it
would be beneficial and not unreasonable. Mr. Carvo suggested adding"producing
family wage jobs"to the Mission Statement and Goals. That would match the council
goals with the Springfield Economic Development Agency goals.
2. Correspondence
a. Letter from Willamalane Parks and Recreation District
Mr.Tamulonis said the board also received a small packet of correspondence from Rick LeBrun
and Dave Carvo.
3. Business from the Staff
a. Update on Meetings.
Mr.Tamulonis said he met with the Goshen Rural Fire District. They did not have any problems
with the plan and there was only a minor area at the southern edge of the Glenwood Urban
Renewal Area that was a concern to them. Staff also met with the Lane County Board of
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes
November 8,2004
Page 2
Commissioners. The Resolution passed by the Commissioners was included in the agenda
packet with a memo from Jeff Towery of Lane County. Additional materials were distributed to
the board as requested by Board Member Ballew. Those included the amount of foregone
revenue that might be anticipated with the Urban Renewal District.
REPORT OF CHAIR
REPORT OF COMMITTEES
OLD BUSINESS
1. Update on Directors/Officers Insurance.
Mr.Tamulonis said the City Council members would be covered as SEDA board members on
the city's insurance with no additional costs. If the board composition changes,that would have
to be reconsidered.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Discussions of Glenwood Urban Renewal Plan.
Mr.Tamulonis noted the changes that were made to the plan since the last meeting. The other
taxing districts have been notified and three of them have asked for changes. The three agencies
requesting changes were Willamalane, Lane County and the Glenwood Water District. He
discussed the changes as noted in the information distributed to the board members. He
discussed establishment of an advisory committee including two Lane County appointments(one
unincorporated area mobile home resident and one unincorporated area homeowner)and two
City of Springfield appointments(one unincorporated area retail business owner/operator and
one unincorporated area industrial business owner/operator). The request from Dave Carvo,
Chair of the Glenwood Water District,was to add a tenth member to the board from the
Glenwood Water District. If SEDA suggested changes to the composition of the board,those
suggestions would go to the City Council. If the City Council accepted those changes,the SEDA
Board would consider the proposals, give ten days notice and adopt those changes at their next
meeting. Mr.Tamulonis said he had a draft of those changes in the by-laws to allow that to
happen as an Urban Renewal Agency.
Mr.Tamulonis referred to the pages from the Urban Renewal Plan which showed the
recommended changes from Willamalane and Lane County. Most changes are minor references
to plans that have been overlooked that are good correcting references. He referred to the change
suggested by Lane County regarding the Lane County Solid Waste Facility.
Board Member Ralston said he doesn't have a problem adding people to the board,but would
prefer having an odd number. He suggested adding two additional members rather than one.
Mr. Kelly said this council or future councils may have interest in creating other Urban Renewal
Districts. The more specialized this district becomes,the more specialized each district will need
to become. Typically,cities have one economic agency that handles Urban Renewal Districts
throughout the area and are administrators of any Urban Renewal Districts in that area. If special
memberships are created on the board,they may not have interest in another area.
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes
November 8,2004
Page 3
Councilor Ralston discussed the issues with an even number of members and breaking a tie. He
would prefer having more representation from the Glenwood area rather than have an even
number.
Councilor Fitch said that is why some suggest having representation on an advisory committee to
function in support of the agency or on the SEDA budget committee. If another Urban Renewal
District was set up in the future, it would not limit the agency on how they could operate.
Councilor Ballew said she liked the idea of expanding the advisory committee rather than
expanding the board. When boards get bigger,they become less efficient.
Councilor Lundberg said some of the committees she has served on have had a large number of
members and it can be very ineffective. If someone from Glenwood were added to the board,
she feels they would need to be an elected person. She agrees there needs to be an advisory
committee,but would recommend the committee for a specific project with a start and end date,
and meet as needed. She discussed the power of the budget committee. That is where projects
and funding are prioritized. The budget committee includes both the board and the additional
representation. Those are the people who will make the biggest decisions about what the Urban
Renewal Agency does in terms of projects. She would assume the budget committee would meet
annually in a series of weekly meetings to choose projects. There are opportunities to participate
as a larger group. She agrees that is difficult not to have someone from Glenwood involved in
every meeting. She is not concerned with having ten members on the board.
Councilor Ralston said he would like to discuss having two County Commissioners on the board.
He would prefer having one County Commissioner and one Glenwood resident.
Councilor Ballew said it may be difficult to limit the number of County Commissioners on the
board because they do have jurisdiction over the unincorporated areas.
Councilor Ralston expressed concern that two County Commissioners would be able to attend all
of the SEDA meetings because of the times they are scheduled.
Councilor Fitch said the commissioners asked to participate.
Mr.Tamulonis said the proposal by Mr. Carvo and the others may be considered by the SEDA
Baord. All proposals can be accepted,rejected or modified by the SEDA Board and City
Council.
Councilor Woodrow asked if the SEDA Board was here to approve the plan. Approving the plan
does not determine the number of members on the SEDA Board.
Mr. Tamulonis said they were here to finalize the plan,and by resolution move it on to the City
Council for action. The SEDA Board does not have the power to modify the membership in the
SEDA Board. The City Council has that authority.
Ms. Kieran said there would be two motions.
IT WAS MOVED BY BOARD MEMBER RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY BOARD
MEMBER WOODROW TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE SPRINGFIELD
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
THAT THE GLENWOOD URBAN RENEWAL PLAN IS ACCEPTED BY THE URBAN
RENEWAL AGENCY AND THE AGENCY FOREWARDS IT TO THE SPRINGFIELD CITY
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes
November 8,2004
Page 4
COUNCIL AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PLAN BY ORDINANCE WITH THE
CHANGES AS NOTED AND THE CHANGES BY THE COUNTY. THE MOTION PASSED
WITH A VOTE OF 7 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
IT WAS MOVED BY BOARD MEMBER LEIKEN WITH A SECOND BY BOARD MEMBER
WOODROW TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL
TO ADD TWO COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO THE SEDA BOARD. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 7 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
IT WAS MOVED BY BOARD MEMBER BALLEW WITH A SECOND BY BOARD
MEMBER RALSTON TO CREATE A GLENWOOD URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY
CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITH A MINIMUM OF TWO MEMBERS
APPOINTED BY LANE COUNTY(ONE UNINCORPORATED AREA MOBILE HOME
RESIDENT AND ONE UNINCORPORATED AREA HOMEOWNER)AND TWO
APPOINTED BY THE CITY(ONE UNINCORPORATED AREA RETAIL BUSINESS
OWNER/OPERATOR AND ONE UNINCORPORATED AREA INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS
OWNER/OPERATOR)AND ONE APPOINTED BY THE GLENWOOD WATER DISTRICT
(A GLENWOOD RESIDENT). THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 7 FOR AND 0
AGAINST.
Mr. Leahy clarified that this was a minimum and the SEDA Board may choose to include
additional members.
IT WAS MOVED BY BOARD MEMBER RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY BOARD
MEMBER LUNDBERG TO ADD A TENTH PERSON TO THE BOARD FROM THE
GLENWOOD WATER DISTRICT BOARD.
(See action noted following discussion.)
Board Member Lundberg said the purpose in having the two Lane County Commissioners on the
board is as representatives of Glenwood. That is their job. She agreed with Mr.Kelly that if
there were more than one Urban Renewal Agency for each URD that might be formed,that could
be a number of boards. It makes more sense to use the elected officials that represent all of an
area on the board. The SEDA budget committee and advisory committee would be the venues to
be inclusive in terms of how those decisions are made. It is not the intention to do anything that
would not benefit the Glenwood area. She would support the nine members including the two
County Commissioners as representatives of the Glenwood residents.
Board Member Woodrow said he appreciated the Glenwood Water District's request,but he
would support remaining with the nine members. If the request from Glenwood Water District is
honored,precedence would be set to include representatives from the Eugene School District,
Willamalane and any other agency that has anything to do with Glenwood. The advisory
committee and the budget committee will provide input from Glenwood residents and the
Glenwood Water District and that would be sufficient.
Board Member Ralston agreed with that,but has a problem with taxation without representation.
In all fairness, it would be reasonable to have at least one person as a representative.
Board Member Woodrow said the people in Springfield that are annexed to the City of
Springfield have the City Council representing them and those in the unincorporated area in
Glenwood have the Lane County Commissioners representing them. The advisory committee
will have a lot of input and a lot to say about what happens in Glenwood.
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes
November 8,2004
Page 5
THE MOTION FAILED WITH A VOTE OF 1 FOR(Ralston)AND 6 AGAINST.
IT WAS MOVED BY BOARD MEMBER RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY WOODROW TO
CHANGE WORDING IN THE SEDA MISSION STATEMENT AND GOALS TO MATCH
THOSE OF COUNCIL GOALS BY ADDING `FAMILY WAGE' JOBS IN SECTION 2(B).
THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 7 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
RESOLUTIONS
Mr.Thmulonis said the Springfield Planning Commission recommended approval of the
Glenwood Urban Renewal Plan. The Planning Commission further encouraged the City Council
to work with the Lane County Board of Commissioners to relocate the Lane County Solid Waste
Disposal Receiving Station from the Glenwood Urban Renewal Area. There was a special notice
mailed regarding tonight's council public hearing to all registered voters in the City of
Springfield and all the residents and registered voters in Glenwood according to the list that was
provided to the city by the Lane County Elections Department.
Mr. Leahy reminded the board that comments shouted from the back of the room would not be
entered into the record. An opportunity for them to sign up and speak needed to be available.
IT WAS MOVED BY BOARD MEMBER BALLEW WITH A SECOND BY BOARD
MEMBER WOODROW TO ACCEPT THE CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY THE
SPRINGFIELD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR FILING. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 7 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:18 pm.
Minutes Recorder—Amy Sowa
Christine Lundberg
Secretary