HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-10-09 SEDA Meeting Minutes MINUTES
Springfield Economic Development Agency
October 9, 2006—6:15 P.M.
Springfield City Hall —Jessie Maine Meeting Room
225 Fifth Street- Springfield
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tammy Fitch, Chair; Anne Ballew, Bill Dwyer, Sid Leiken, Christine
Lundberg, Joe Pishioneri, Dave Ralston, Faye Stewart, and John Wood-
row.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: John Tamulonis, Gino Grimaldi, Kevin Ko, Joe Leahy
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Tammy Fitch called the meeting of the Springfield Economic Development
Agency (SEDA) to order at 6:10 p.m.
Minutes Recorder Daniel Lindstrom called the roll stumblingly and stated that a quorum was
present.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Director Dave Ralston moved, seconded by Director Joe Pishioneri, to accept the min-
utes of the September 25, 2006, meeting. The motion was adopted unanimously, 7:0,
Director Christine Lundberg having not yet joined the meeting.
III. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Business from the Audience
None.
B. Correspondence
Community Development Manager John Tamulonis reported that several telephone calls
and letters regarding the Glenwood Riverfront Development had been received. He said
they had especially encouraged the inclusion of bicycle/pedestrian pathways in any plan
that was adopted.
C. l usiness from Staff
Mr. Tamulonis reported that the next SEDA meeting would include consideration of an of-
fer for the purchase of property in an Executive Session.
Mr. Tamulonis suggested that the rumored departure of the Chairperson as a SEDA mem-
ber would necessitate choosing new officers. He proposed that an election be held in
January 2007.
Annomormen
PIM° Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes
October 9, 2006
Page 2
IV. REPORT OF THE CHAIR
Chairperson Fitch expressed appreciation to the members of the presentations Evaluation
Committee and Planning, Public Works, and Finance staff for their commitment to the tasks of
preparing a.iecommendation regarding a Glenwood Riverfront Master Developer.
V. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
None.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Recommendation for Glenwood Riverfront Master Developer
Mr. Tamulonis distributed copies of material distributed by representatives of the Glenwood
Riverfront Company and APEX Investment Group and copies of questions asked by the
Evaluation Committee at its October 2, 2006 all-day session. He said copies of video pres-
entations made by the groups were available on request.
Mr. Tamulonis distributed copies of an October 9 memorandum with a staff recommenda-
tion for Glenwood Riverfront Master Developer. He said it was based on evaluatipns of
presentations made at the October 2 meeting and evaluations of both proposals prepared
by City Planning and Public Works staff. He said evaluations of the proposals and their
presenters by independent financial advisors were not yet completed, but would be avail-
able if SEDA approved continuing discussions with one of the Master Developers.
Director Christine Lundberg joined the meeting at 6:25 p.m.
Mr. Tamulonis reviewed Planning and Public Works issues related to the proposals in-
cluded in his memorandum. He summarized Evaluation Committee rankings and com-
ments also included. He highlighted additional comments about each proposal included.
Mr. Tamulonis stated that SEDA staff recommended that the Board continue discussions
with APEX Investment Group and receive a full presentation of its proposal at an extended
November 6 meeting. He reviewed reasons contributing to the recommendation included
in his memorandum.
Director Sid Leiken requested that a member of the Evaluation Committee comment on the
presentations and staff recommendation.
David Carvo stated that he was impressed with the emphasis in the APEX presentation
that access to the river would be valuable in the development and that the location was
ideal for its use. He said he believed the APEX proposal met all the requirements set by
SEDA, but that the Glenwood Riverfront Company proposal became bogged down in prob-
lems to be faced. He suggested that the APEX proposal showed the most "concern for
people" and said it was positive that a former Glenwood resident was on its presentation
team. He said he was impressed with the well-rounded and professional/educational skills
of the APEX project managers and with their knowledge of local land use requirements
and opportunities.
Director Stewart said he believed both proposals had been well prepared and would likely
be successful. He said the Glenwood Riverfront Company proposal seemed most inter-
ested in "horizontal" (land) development, whereas the APEX proposal appeared to have an
ability and preference for doing horizontal and "vertical" (buildings) development. He said
he appreciated the APEX emphasis on its vision for the Riverfront property, versus the
Glenwood reliance on market preferences to determine a development strategy. He said
he was concerned that the Glenwood proposal considered control of Franklin Boulevard an
impediment to development that would require intervention by the City, whereas APEX as-
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes
October 9, 2006
Page 3
sumed it would participate, or even take the lead, in resolution of problems related to it that
affected project access. He said he was surprised at the awareness of local conditions
presented by APEX. He said APEX appeared to have greater financial resources available
for the project.
Director Leiken asked if assurances of the financial condition of APEX were available. Mr.
Tamulonis said a full report of the financial statuses of the proposal presenters could be
available if SEDA chose to accept the staff recommendation.
Director Ralston asked if all members of the Evaluation Committee agreed with the rec-
ommendation to continue discussions with APEX. Mr. Tamulonis said his recommendation
was based on the evaluations of Planning staff, Public Works staff, and Evaluation Com-
mittee. He reviewed criteria percentage scores compiled for each proposal submitted by
members of the Committee included in his memorandum.
Director Pishioneri asked if the experience of APEX in the development of other projects
had been investigated. Mr. Tamulonis reported that a report on such issues would be in-
cluded in the report to be received from the independent financial advisors.
Director Leiken asked if SEDA members were allowed to contact representatives of the
Portland Development Corporation about its experience with APEX. SEDA Attorney Joe
Leahy stated that since no decision regarding a contract with APEX would be made at the
current meeting, such contact was permitted.
Chairperson Fitch said she believed it was appropriate to continue discussions with APEX
regarding its Glenwood Riverfront development proposal.
Director Ralston said he was disappointed that the presentation from the Glenwood River-
front Company had not fared better in the evaluation process. He said he would have pre-
ferred to deal with a locally owned company in the development project. Mr. Tamulonis
said video tape recordings of the presentations and Evaluation Committee discussions had
been made and were available to SEDA members.
Director Anne Ballew said she believed the Evaluation Committee and staff had correctly
recommended that discussions continue with APEX, but that the financial evaluation of its
experience would be crucial in a decision to choose it as Master Developer for the project.
Director Ballew moved, seconded by Director Pishioneri, to continue discussions
with APEX Investment Group and have a presentation of its development proposal
and a report from the independent financial advisors made at a SEDA meeting on
November 6, 2006. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0.
Mr. Tamulonis expressed appreciation for the service of the members of the Evaluation
Committee and other staff reviewers.
Director Ralston said he believed it would be important to ensure in a relationship with
APEX for Springfield interests to remain in control and influence.
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Part-time Staff Position •
Mr. Tamulonis referred to an Agenda Item Summary entitled "Proposed Part-Time, Limited
Duration Staff Position" and reviewed information it contained regarding the recruitment of
a half-time Planner to serve as SEDA staff. He said establishing a relationship with APEX
as Master Developer would quickly "ramp up" the need for such a position. He recom-
mended that a request to assist with recruitment of a person to fill the position be initiated
with the City of Springfield in a timely manner to allow hiring of a person to be considered
at a November SEDA meeting.
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes
October 9, 2006
Page 4
Chairperson Fitch said she believed a suggestion previously made by Director Bill Dwyer
should be included that the responsibilities of the position should include supervision of po-
tential University of Oregon interns.
Director John Woodrow moved, seconded by Director Pishioneri, to request that the
City of Springfield recruit a person to serve as a half-time Planner 1, limited-duration
SEDA employee.
Director Ballew said she was concerned about the financial impact of hiring someone for
such a position. She said she was also concerned that the Planner 1 skill set would not be
adequate for the responsibilities of the position.
Mr. Tamulonis replied that consideration had also been given to establishing Management
Analyst or Secretary/Clerk qualifications for the position, but that the need to work with
both the Master Developer and with citizens suggested that setting the qualifications
"somewhere in the middle" would be most beneficial.
Director Ballew asked if current SEDA revenue was adequate to cover the cost of the pro-
posed position and other staff and operating obligations. Mr. Tamulonis replied that it was
possible that adding the position would strain available resources, but that it was possible
that the position would be of short duration.
Director Ballew asked if the City Human Resources Department had been contacted re-
garding the position. Mr. Tamulonis replied that its representatives had agreed that the job
description attached to the Agenda Item Summary was appropriate.
Director Leiken asked if funding the position could be included in a Development Agree-
ment established with a Master Developer. Mr. Tamulonis said the City had experience in
creating such an arrangement and that the possibility would be explored.
The motion to request City assistance in recruiting a SEDA employee was adopted,
7:1, with Director Ballew voting no.
B. Glenwood Residential Improvement Program
Housing Division lead staff Kevin Ko referred to an Agenda Item Summary entitled "Glen-
wood Residential Improvement Program" and reviewed its description of a proposal for a
housing rehabilitation loan program for Glenwood residents. He explained that its goals
would be to maintain current housing stock and provide a way for low-income homeowners
to make improvements to their primary residences.
Director Ralston said he supported the program idea, but that he did not believe there were
Springfield resources available to fund it. Chairperson Fitch replied that SEDA funds
would be used to support the program.
Director Woodrow asked if homes using septic tank waste disposal systems would be eli-
gible to participate in the proposed program. Mr. Ko replied that, with certain limitations, it
would be possible. He explained that, in one instance, the parallel City program had used
the available loan to facilitate annexation and attachment to the sewer system.
Director Pishioneri asked for an explanation of improvements allowed to be paid for by the
proposed loan program. Mr. Ko stated that almost any improvement, except expansion,
would be eligible, if it made a home more comfortable, efficient, or enabled it to meet build-
ing code requirements.
Director Lundberg asked what eligibility standards would be used for the proposed pro-
gram. Mr. Ko replied that the standards would be set by SEDA. Mr. Tamulonis suggested
that U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) standards for such loans
might be adopted for the Glenwood area.
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes
October 9, 2006
Page 5
Director Leiken stated that he supported the proposed program and favored using HUD
eligibility standards. He suggested that the entire program be exactly parallel to the similar
program operated by the City. He said it was important for investment to be made in the
housing stock of Glenwood.
Director Pishioneri said he agreed with Director Leiken and suggested that the program
include facilitation for annexation of properties to the City.
Director Ballew asked if the deferred payment loans would continue to be obligated to
SEDA if a property was annexed. Mr. Ko replied that it would. Mr. Leahy added that if
SEDA were dissolved, arrangements would be made for its outstanding loans to be trans-
ferred to the City. He added that there were certain minor legal alterations he would sug-
gest regarding the proposal.
Director Woodrow moved, seconded by Director Lundberg, to approve the proposal
for a Glenwood Residential Improvement Program, amended by suggestions of the
City Attorney.
Chairperson Fitch determined that there was agreement to not vote on the motion, but wait
until a final version of the proposal was available.
VI. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
Chairperson Fitch announced that the next SEDA meeting would be held November 6 in the
Library Meeting Room, allowing the participation of citizens and especially Glenwood resi-
dents.
The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
(Recorded by Daniel Lindstrom)
L--
Christine Lundberg
Secretary