HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/02/2007 Work Session
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, APRIL 2, 2007
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225
Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, April 2, 2007 at 6:02 p.m., with Mayor Leiken
presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Lundberg, Ballew, Ralston, Woodrow and
Pishioneri. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Interim Assistant City Manager
Mike Harman, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
Councilor Wylie was absent.
1. Council Communication Options.
Information Technology Director Rod Lathrop presented the staff report on this item. The City
engages in primarily paper-based communications with the Mayor and City Council. There is no
mechanism for the City to send electronic mail, electronic meeting notifications, online agenda
packets or electronic documents to elected officials. This hanlpers the ability of the City to
communicate with elected leadership during the conduct of regular business, and could be a
constraint during an emergency.
Staff communication with elected officials was raised as an issue during the December 4, 2006
City Council Emergency Management work session. Options were presented and discussed at a
Council Work Session on February 5, 2007. Subsequent two-on-two meetings were held with
elected and appointed City leadership. These follow-up meetings have identified four options for
enhancing communication between the City of Springfield and top elected leadership:
1. Status Quo, no new capabilities, no additional costs;
2. CelVInternet allowance of $45 per month, to reimburse elected leadership for using their
personal cell phones and Internet resources for city business. Costs $3,780 per year.
3. Furnish Smartphones and wireless service to interested Elected Officials. Other
Councilors would receive the $45 monthly celVInternet allowance. Cost would be $6,452
the. first year;
4. Option Four would add a laptop computer to the solutions identified in Option Three.
First year costs would be $8,452.
Mr. Lathrop reviewed the issues regarding this subject that had been discussed during the
different meetings with Council members. He went over the four options proposed.
Councilor Woodrow asked for clarification regarding use of personal equipment for City
business and whether or not that made the equipment reviewable by anyone requesting public
. records. .
Mr. Leahy said the City information would be public. If there were questions, and the Councilor
maintained that it was personal, the City would object to the release ofthe personal information,
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 2, 2007
Page 2
and the District Attorney's (D.A.'s) office would make a decision. If the City disagreed with the
D.A.'s decision, it would go to ajudge for review and a decision.
Councilor Woodrow asked if someone could physically take his personal laptop. His concern
was that his laptop contained business information from his work.
Mr. Leahy said requests were handled on the honor system and the Councilor would be
responsible for providing the information in response to a public records request. If the
requestor felt that the Councilor was not providing the information, something would need to be
worked out with Information Technology (IT) to retrieve the public information while protecting
the integrity ofthe Councilor's personal equipment.
Mr. Lathrop said IT could work through that issue if it arose. The process would be the Sanle
with the Councilors' existing status quo option regarding public records requests.
Councilor Woodrow said his concern was that he had proprietary information on his laptop and
that was where he received his City email. He would not be comfortable giving his laptop to
anyone because it could cost his company money.
Councilor Pishioneri said he liked Option 3 for now. He would like to keep Option 4 available in
case it was found that there was a stronger need at a later date.
Mr. Lathrop said Option 3 was the IT recommendation to meet the majority of needs expressed.
Councilor Ballew said she was personally happy to remain with the status quo, but felt it was
good to leave all the options available.
Council consensus was to proceed with Option 3.
2. Progress Report on Fire Station #1 Rehabilitation.
Interim Assistant City Manager Mike Harman presented the staff report on this item. Fire
Station #1, located at 6853 Main Street, was originally constructed in about 1980. It was a
cutting edge design at the time, using passive solar design elements, and was built to house 3
firefighters and 1 fire apparatus. Twenty-seven years later, the station houses 5 firefighters, 3 to
4 pieces of apparatus, does not meet current seismic standards and lacks adequate dormitory
space to accommodate a multi-gender workforce.
The Fire & Life Safety Department has been working to address water intrusion and mold
problems inside the station. Work on the facility has uncovered extensive problems with water
damage and dry rot. Findings from a mold test in June 2005 resulted in the crews being moved
out of the facility (see Attachment 2).
In March of 2007, the City received a report from Architect Paul Bentley (Attachment 3)
assessing the current condition of the Station and the options for moving forward. The
advantages and disadvantages, as well as rough order of magnitude cost estimates, were
requested for three options as follows:
1.) Return the Station to its original condition;
2.) Save the existing structure but add dormitory space as part of the .
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 2, 2007
Page 3
reconstruction process;
3.) Tear down the existing structure and construct a new Station at the
current location to meet current space needs and seismic standards.
Because of the extensive work already done to the structure, and because the need for dormitory
facilities has long been recognized, Option 1 (which was the original intent of the project) is no
longer recommended as a solution. Option 2 retains the value of the remaining structure, but
limits options for remodeling, and bears a risk that mold and water problems could reappear.
The estimated cost difference between Options 2 and 3 is between $150,000 and $250,000,
depending on how much of the remaining structure can be saved, in today's dollars.
In order to maximize our future investment, the preferred option is Option 3. The best available-
cost estimate for this option, in today's dollars, is $1,880,000.
Mr. Grimaldi noted the location of Fire Station 1 in the Thurston area. He reviewed the
problems that were involved with the building. Once staff saw the extent of the issues, they felt
there was a need to rebuild the facility. Tonight staff wanted to talk about the options. The goal
was to make the best investment possible looking towards the future.
Mr. Harman said in March 2007, stafftalked to an architect, Paul Bentley, to evaluate three
options for the facility and provide rough estimates of cost. Mr. Bentley was familiar with the
building since he had done assessments of all Springfield fire stations in 1999 and provided
recommendations regarding maintenance. Mr. Harman reviewed the options considered and the
advantages and disadvantages of each option. He noted that some of the mold found in the
building was toxic and although it had been removed, would likely return due to the structure
and design of the building. He explained why staff felt Option 3 was the best choice. The
details were noted in the Council Briefing Memorandum included in the agenda packet. He
explained why the estimates between Option 2 and Option 3 were not more significant.
Mayor Leiken commended staff for contracting with Paul Bentley. He was a very good architect
and was the architect who designed the Gateway station. The information laid out by Mr.
Bentley gave a good idea of how the City should proceed. Mayor Leiken said his personal
opinion was to have the fire fighters do a practice burn on the existing building. It would be
better to spend the money to build a new building for the long run. It was an asset that would
increase in value. Fire fighters were unique and the station was their home away from home.
The City had a responsibility to make sure the fire fighters were treated well and were in a
position where they could do their jobs well. He said the City was proud of their firefighters and
this would help them continue to do a great job. This option may put fire fighters out of the
station for one year, but in the long run it was the best option.
Councilor Ballew said it was unfortunate that we spent the money we did trying to fix the
problem, but the difference between bringing it up to standard and building a new facility was
not much in the overall scope of project. She felt the City needed to go forward and build a new
facility.
Councilor Ralston agreed it was disappointing to have spent the money to get to this point. He
asked where the money would come from for the building.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 2, 2007
Page 4
Mr. Grimaldi said there were several options listed in the agenda packet. Staff would come back
to Council at a later date with more specifics. He briefly reviewed some of funding options such
as using reserves, using funds from other projects or borrowing some of the funds. Staff was
confident they could make adjustments in the budget to get it done.
Discussion was held regarding the possibility of building or moving another station and the study
being done to determine station locations. Staff would bring the discussion regarding station
location to the Council at a later date.
Councilor Ralston said he didn't like using reserves. He wanted to look at the option of a small
bond measure to replace the station.
Mr. Grimaldi said they could put that as an option. He said that option could pose a delay,
however, because it would need a double majority and would most likely need to go on the ballot
in an even numbered year. He said the difference in the interest rate between a bond measure
and loan was not that much.
Finance Director Bob Duey said it would not be much different as they were both tax exempt.
Mr. Grimaldi said they could get a bank loan and move ahead very quickly.
Councilor Pishioneri said Option 3 seemed the most logical although the most painful. In the
interim he would like to look closely at what the City was spending now and how the fire
fighters would be housed. The City could buy the tent used to store the equipment, and then sell
it after the year, rather than continue to rent it. He would like to look at any way to curb costs.
He said it was a good opportunity for design and suggested giving the building a peaked roof
rather than flat.
Councilor Woodrow asked when staff would come back with financial options.
Mr. Duey said it could be done soon.
Councilor Woodrow agreed Option 3 was the best option.
Councilor Lundberg asked how long it would take from now, including time to figure out costs
and other issues.
Mr. Harman said some of the work would overlap. He asked the consultant for a time line and
was told about a year.
Mr. Grimaldi discussed some of the steps, such as determining the right location and going out
for bid for construction.
Councilor Ballew asked about using the plans from our most recent fire station.
Mr. Grimaldi said different sites required different designs and he wouldn't recommend using
plans for another facility.
Councilor Lundberg asked about looking at growth in that area.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 2, 2007
Page 5
Councilor Pishioneri suggested looking at recently constructed stations in similar areas over the
last few years.
Mayor Leiken asked about the interest rate if the funds were borrowed.
Mr. Duey said it would be somewhere below five percent.
Mayor Leiken said the sooner the better to avoid weath~r issues.
Consensus was to move forward with Option 3.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 pm.
Minutes Recorder - Amy Sowa
\
Attest: