HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/23/2008 Work Session
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, JUNE 23, 2008
The City of Springfield Council met in a joint work session with the Springfield Planning
Commission in the Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday,
June 23, 2008 at 5:35 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Lundberg, Wylie, Ballew, Woodrow, and Pishioneri.
Also present were Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder
Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
Councilor Ralston was absent (excused).
Planning Commission Chair Frank Cross called the Planning Commission to order. Present were
Commission Chair Cross and Commissioners Johnny Kirschenmann, Steve Moe, Terri Leezer,
Eric Smith and Sherri Moore.
Commissioner Beyer was absent (excused).
1. Economic Opportunities Analysis / Economic Development Strategy.
City Planner David Reesor presented the staff report on this item. The purpose of this joint City
Council/Planning Commission work session is to: (I) present survey results to the Planning
Commission / City Council; (2) discuss economic development objectives and target industries
based on the June 9th work session; (3) presept employment forecasts and receive direction
regarding preferred methodology; and (4) discuss redevelopment potential in Springfield.
ECONorthwest will facilitate this work session.
The attached memoranda provide employment forecasts and a summary of the results of the
Community Development Survey. These findings will be discussed at the work session.
ECONorthwest will seek input from the Couricil and Planning Commission regarding the
following questions:
· What is the appropriate rate of employment growth for Springfield over the next twenty-
years?
· How much redevelopment does the City want to encourage? What type of redevelopment
should be encouraged and where should it occur? .
· Does the City want to encourage employment in non-employment zones? In other words, to
what extent does the City want to allow or encourage home-based occupations and
neighborhood commercial uses?
ECONorthwest is requesting direction from the City Council and the Planning Commission
regarding the preferred methodology for employment growth. The employment growth rate will
ultimately guide the site needs analysis portion ofthe UGB study. The State allows cities to
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 23, 2008
Page 2
choose a "safe harbor" approach to forecast employment growth in order to satisfy policy
requirements. The City is not obligated to use a safe harbor method, but selecting a rate that does
not exceed either of the safe harbors listed in OAR 660-024-0040(8) significantly decreases the
chances of the forecast being challenged successfully. One potential safe harbor method (Option
1) assumes employment will grow at the same rate as population (1 %). The second safe harbor
method (Option 2) assumes that Springfield's employment will grow at the same rate as Lane
County's employment (1.4%). The third option (not safe harbor - Option 3) assumes that
Springfield will capture a larger share of regional employment and grow at a faster rate than
. Lane County's employment (2%). Again, however, staff agrees with the consultant that the
complexities associated with not selecting a safe harbor option create risk that would distract
Springfield from its goal of establishing the discrete UGB and expanding it, as preliminary
findings indicate will be necessary. Reexamining the employment forecast after establishment
and expansion of the UGB can occur at any time and be completed as a post-acknowledgement
plan amendment. As mentioned in the memorandum in the agenda packet related to employment
forecast, ECONorthwest recommends that the City use the Lane County employment
growth rate methodology (Option 2) because (1) it uses a safe harbor methodology, and (2) the
population growth rate methodology (Option I) could be questioned since the urban area does
not have a coordinated population forecast.
Mr. Parker presented on behalf of ECONorthwest. He presented a power point presentation.
They were looking for direction from Council of what they would like staff to do in terms of
employment forecast. From the last meeting, ECONorthwest drafted a list of economic
development objectives and target industries.
Mr. Parker said the CIBL project was started in February and at that time the stakeholder
committee was established to provide input throughout the process. He referred to the timeline
included in the power point presentation and noted that they were right on schedule. The
alternatives analysis was a lot to process and a lot of decisions needed to be made which may
slow down the timeline.
Mr. Parker discussed the Community Survey results. He discussed the respondents of the survey.
The survey was an online survey, so was a self-selecting sample and not representative of the
community. He reviewed the percentages of respondents from different categories. The intent of
the survey was to identify the range of opinions that existed within the community, target areas
we needed to pay attention to in the future part of this process, and a pulse of where the
community was in terms of economic development.
Councilor Lundberg asked about the percentages of those working in the public or private sector.
Mr. Parker referred to question 38 on page 15 in the packet which broke down the respondents
and where they worked. He continued to discuss the survey results regarding things Springfield
was doing well. He also spoke regarding concerns, such as environmental quality and quality of
life.
Councilor Ballew said the results did not show overwhelming numbers of those that had
concerns about these issues.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 23, 2008
Page 3
Discussion was held regarding the weight given to the responses. Mr. Parker said the statements
were very broad in the survey. Additional work would need to be done to understand opinions on
specifics.
Mayor Leiken said in the past ten years, Springfield had put into place a number of
environmental policies. Our groundwater protection program had set a trend and had become
part of doing business in Springfield. He had heard compliments about Springfield's
groundwater protection plan while back in Washington DC. He agreed that environmental
quality was key. He hoped people weren't assuming Springfield didn't already have these
programs in place.
Mr. Parker said these were concerns and the City had taken steps to address those concerns over
the years. He continued with the power point presentation and discussed commercial and
industrial land and a possible urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion. He discussed the
responses to the question of employment growth. The City, Springfield Chamber and Lane
Metro Partnership should all work to recruit, retain and expand businesses. He discussed the
responses regarding support policies to retain and expand businesses and those supporting
development downtown and in commercial centers. He discussed the responses regarding quality
of life and quality of workers. He also discussed respondents in support of providing flexible and
smaller sites. The issues respondents were concerned about included failure to attract businesses,
appearance of downtown and Glenwood, and lengthy and costly building permitting process.
Some actions to help solve these issues included targeted, active business recruiting, cleaning up
streets and storefronts, and streamlining the permitting process. He also reviewed what in
Springfield was attractive to employers and areas of improvement, such as City government
embracing new businesses, quality of life in Springfield, and low taxes, utilities, operating costs
and housing. He also reviewed the areas of improvement.
Mayor Leiken asked about the respondents' suggestion of providing tax breaks to businesses.
Beth Goodman from ECONorthwest said the respondents to that question were current business
owners. They wanted tax breaks for existing businesses rather than only new businesses.
Mr. Parker discussed this response and the challenges for retaining and rebuilding existing
businesses. He discussed the number of businesses that had responded to the survey and the
number of employees for each of those businesses. He discussed some of the concerns from the
business owner respondents. Most business expansions in the near future from the respondents
would be small.
Mr. Cross asked how many respondents were business owners.
Ms. Goodman said 86 of the 217 respondents, which was about forty-four percent.
Mayor Leiken asked when this survey took place.
Mr. Parker said it was available online from April through May 27; about 6 weeks. It was
advertised on the City's website and in the Register Guard. .
Councilor Woodrow asked how much weight wasput on each of the questions.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 23, 2008
Page .4
Mr. Parker said not a lot of weight. This survey was indicative of community perceptions and
what their industries needed. The Economic Opportunities Analysis would be more specific. This
was a small subset of business in the community. It was interesting, but not helpful in developing
a broader economic strategy.
Councilor Woodrow said it would be interesting to know how many Council members, City
staff, and members of the City's boards, committees and commissions responded compared to
the community in general.
Mr. Parker said they had no way to find that out. This information was not representative of our
community. If council felt additional disclaimers needed to be noted on the results, they could do
that. People who were interested filled out the survey. There was some information in the survey
that was reflective of community values.
Mayor Leiken said 214 was a good number of respondents. Ifbusiness owners were willing to
take this survey, that was complimentary.
Mr. Parker said the numbers were very good. He said he appreciated Council's questions about
the methodology and validity of the information.
Mayor Leiken said many people didn't understand the implications of Measures 47 and 50.
When the City was trying to provide services, citizens didn't match site size with possible
property taxes. The respondents were likely to look at what Springfield could do to help them out
to expand or stay in business. He said the numbers were positive over all. It was important to be
aware of the respondents' concern for the enviro$ent. This was a good base and gave a good
feel of where people in the business community were coming from. He felt it showed we had
made a lot of improvements, but still had a long way to go.
Commissioner Moore referred to page 6 of the power point under "Focus business recruitment
on businesses that provide higher-wage or family-wage jobs". The sites were more related to
retail, which were not necessarily family wage jobs. There seemed to be a disconnect on what
would provide those higher wage jobs.
Mr. Parker said any survey had issues that could be debated. This survey did paint a picture of
the community and what the community wanted. A lot of the responses were based on
perception.
Mr. Parker moved on to the employment forecast and the reasons for forecasting employment.
He was looking for Council's direction on this so they could take that information back to the
stakeholders committee. The forecasting was more about opportunities. Through these policies,
the State was encouraging cities to determine the types of businesses they wanted and identify
enough sites to accommodate choices in the market. The sites needs analysis had not been done
yet, but would be done in the future. He discussed the Safe Harbor approach and explained the
different methodologies available for the City to use. ECONorthwest had calculated the different
scenarios. He referred to Attachment I, page 4 in the agenda packet which had a chart showing
the results of the three options and explained each.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 23, 2008
Page 5
Councilor Ballew said there were separate population and employment growth rates. She asked
about the relationship ofthe two.
Mr. Parker said they typically tried to get the two to align. Council had looked at population
growth back in December 2007 and had chosen 1.7%, which was higher than Safe Harbor.
Typically, they tried to keep the increases about the same. To maintain the employment balance,
the population and employment rate should be as close as possible and self contained. It was
appropriate for the City to determine their objective.
Mayor Leiken asked when the employment forecast could be reviewed again if the City went
with Safe Harbor.
Mr. Parker said the State suggested the City adopt objectives to maintain a short-term supply of
land, and have policies for replacement of land. The City could dictate when they wanted to
review that, but it was a complicated process. The City may want to establish urban reserves for
longer term planning.
Mayor Leiken said in December, Council was exploring that and possibly putting forth urban
reserves. They could try to look out five to twenty years, but would be lucky to plan for two
years out for a number of reasons.
Mr. Parker said it was at the City's discretion. One of the things they had heard at the last
meeting was to identify ways to be flexible so the City could take advantage of opportunities as
they came along. Part of the reason urban reserves were not being considered at this time was
because HB3337 gave specific mandates. The community development's objective was to
establish the UGB first and then move on from there.
Councilor Ballew recalled that Council had rejected urban reserves in the past.
Planning Manager Mott said they no longer were consistent with the law. Staff could do some
r<esearch on areas that could now qualify for urban reserves due to changes in the UGB.
Commissioner Kirschenmann referred to the Mayor's question about Safe Harbor and asked if
post acknowledgement amendment could be allowed at any time.
Mr. Parker said that would be at the City's discretion.
Mr. Parker further discussed the option using Safe Harbor. From the work they did with the
Council and Planning Commission at their June 9 meeting, economic development objectives
had been developed. They had come up with fifteen potential objectives and a long-term vision
of where the City wanted to go with economic development. He reviewed the fifteen objectives.
Discussion was held regarding some of the jobs noted in the objectives.
Mr. Parker asked if they wanted to include a transportation related objective. The group reviewed
the objectives to see ifone of those fit with a transportation objective. It was noted that
Springfield had a good public transportation system in place with L TD and EmX.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 23, 2008
Page 6
Discussion was held on the high cost of fuel and that the objectives relating to development and
employment close to housing would become more and more important. There was a variety of
options that captured public transportation.
Commissioner Moe said he would like the City to know where the large sites were to streamline
the process of getting businesses.
Mr. Parker said Public Works was working on that as part of this process.
Councilor Woodrow said personally he didn't want to live right within the urban area and many
residents wanted quiet streets. There were some places that fit with high density areas and
businesses close by.
Mr. Parker said that was the balance.
Councilor Lundberg said ECONorthwest had captured well what had come out of the June 9
meeting.
Mr. Parker said this would come back to the City Council and Planning Commission in future
meetings and would be processed through the stakeholders committee.
Mr. Parker discussed the preliminary target industries and listed those that were brought forward
on June 9 as well as additional targets from ECONorthwest.
Discussion was held regarding green industries.
Mr. Parker said ECONorthwest could address this further and provide more structure if
requested, including actions the City could take to develop a more sustainable green industry
base.
Councilor Lundberg said she would like a definition of green industry.
Mr. Parker said they struggled with that and had found there was no classification for green
industries. It was as much of a practice as classification.
Commissioner Cross asked what ECONorthwest was looking for from the City Council and
Planning Commission when they said green manufacturing.
Mr. Parker said maybe nothing this evening other than affirmation to move forward with this.
They would have a more detailed discussion with the stakeholder's committee.
Councilor Wylie said as energy became more of an issue, recycled products and solar energy
were more in demand. It could be an economic development opportunity.
Mr. Parker said many economists were talking about a green economy.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 23, 2008
Page 7
Mayor Leiken said green economy had been going on for a number of years. Many business
owners age forty-five and under were already building green into their businesses. They needed
to get beyond the buzzword 'green' and make it the practice.
Mr. Parker said there would be a market response. He continued the review of the target list.
Councilor Ballew asked if the City would be interested in large scale manufacturing if it were
available.
Mr. Parker said they would be looking at larger sites for that, but statistics showed that small
scale manufacturing would be preferable.
Mayor Leiken asked if there was a real potential for biotech employment.
Mr. Parker said there was not a presence at this time, but it could fit well with medical clusters.
He explained. He reviewed the remaining targets.
Councilor Lundberg said wood products had been here forever and was fairly stable. She was
concerned about the high risk with places such as Sony. Some companies evolved quickly and
then had to be moved quickly. She would like to keep a sense of what companies were low risk
and which were high risk.
Mr. Parker said that was a challenge with many companies. That was part of the risk of
economic development. There were cycles with wood products in this region as well. From
tonight's input, there was strong support for redevelopment in Glenwood and downtown and
infill in other existing refill areas. ECONorthwest would do some analysis and put boundaries on
what that might accommodate overt this planning cycle for the City. They would be back to meet
with the City Council and Planning Commission in September.
Mayor Leiken thanked them for the presentation and said it went very well.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 pm.
Minutes Recorder - Amy Sowa
Attest:
~