HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/01/1995 Regular
~~
.
City of Springfield
Regular Council Meeting
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
I
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, MAY 1,1995 I
The City of Springfield Council met in Regular Session in the Springfield City Council Chamber
Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, May 1, 1995, at 7:08 p.J., with Mayor
Morrisette presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Morrisette, Councilors Beyer, Shaver, Walters, Burge, Maine and Dahlquist.
Also present were City Manager Michael Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimkldi, City
Attorney Tim Harold, Administrative Aide Julie Wilson and members of the staff. I
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Morrisette.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Father Hondros, St. George Greek Orthodox Church.
.
SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT
1. Jonathan Siegle, Springfield High School, invited Council to attend the production of Music
Man and encouraged the community to support the students and the production.
2. Mayor Bill Morrisette, Tonya Johnson and Melody Kelsay presented the Human II Rights Award
to Shelly Shrauger and Rosemary Schamber.
3, Mayor Morrisette and Jeanette Cardwell recognized Richard Carlson for service ~o the
community. I
CONSENT CALENDAR I
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WlTII A SECOND BY COUNCJOR MAINE,
!
TO ADOPT THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6
FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
1. Claims
2. Minutes
a. April 10, 1995 - Special Joint Meeting
b. April 17, 1995 - Work Session
.
3. Resolutions
Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 2
.
4. Ordinances
5, Other Routine Matters
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Citizen Initiated Mid-Springfield Refinement Plan Diagram Amendment (Jo. No. 94-10-194),
Leon and Vickie Search, Applicants.
.
City Planner Gary Karp presented the staff report on this issue. The Springfield Development
Code (SDC) requires the City Council to approve or deny refinement plan amendments upon
recommendation from the Planning Commission. At the original March 6 publici hearing date
for the refinement plan amendment, the applicant requested the City Council to postpone the
I
public hearing until April 3. The applicant also waived the 120 day review timeline mandated
I
by the State and the SDC. The City Council approved that request to postpone the public
hearing and a subsequent postponement until May 1. However, the applicant ha~ submitted
additional information on April 20 which will result in a revised staff report. I
The applicant requested the previous postponements due to negotiations with Willamalane
Parks and Recreation District relating to a land purchase. This purchase is currdntly underway
and alters the original refinement plan amendment application. . Staff is asking thkt the City
Council approve this request to postpone the public hearing for the refinement plb amendment
from May 1 until May 15 so that a revised staff report can be prepared. I
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
I
SHAVER, TO POSTPONE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS REQUEST ~ROM MAY 1
UNTIL MAY 15. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
2. CDAC Funding Recommendations for the 1995-96 Community Development BILk Grant
Program.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-34 - A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PROPOSED
STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES AND PROJECTED
USE OF FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995-96, I
Management Analyst Lynn Nakamura presented the staff report on this issue. The Community
Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) has prepared for the Mayor and CoJncil's
consideration funding recommendations for the 1995-96 CDBG Program. A todl of 11
proposals were received totaling $911,125. A total of$504,363 in uncommitted CDBG funds
is available for FY 1995-96.
In 1995-96, Springfield's new CDBG allocation is $725,000. With the addition 6f$55,000 in
estimated loan repayments from the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program and $:11,363 in
,
unallocated funds from previous years, the entire CDBG budget for FY 1995-96 lis 791,363.
The City is an entitlement jurisdiction guaranteed to receive federal funding from! the U. S,
Department of Housing and Urban Development. The new grant funds will becobe available
on July 1, 1995. I
Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 3
.
In February, the CDAC held a public hearing and developed local funding priorities to guide the
1995-96 CDBG funding process. The local funding priorities were presented to Council in a
Communications Packet on February 24, 1995. As part of the local funding pridrities, 15
percent of the new grant was allocated to social service activities funded through Ithe
Intergovernmental Health and Human Services Committee and 17 percent of the grant was
committed to grant administration and planning activities. The remaining 68 pertent of the new
grant plus an unallocated balance from previous years of $11,363, totaling $504)363 was made
available for competition through a "request for proposal" process.
Mayor Morrisette opened the public hearing.
1. Richard Carlson, 833 North 5th Street, spoke in support of the CDAC fundillg
recommendations for the 95-96 CDBG Program. He supported the Pride Patk request
made by Willamalane Parks and Recreation. He felt the park should be comPleted.
He also discussed a comment in the Springfield News regarding this funding Inot being used
I
for street improvements. He reminded Council that Council supported the West M Street
paving project.
.
2. Phillip Farrington, 680 North 36th Street, representing Willlamalane Parks and Recreation
District, spoke in support of funding for Tyson Park Playground and Pride P~rk.
3. Christine Lundberg, 127 Woodlane Drive, spoke.in support of the West M sLeet paving
project.
4, Alisa Carrillo, 488 West M Street, spoke in support of the West M Street project.
5. Sharla Davis, 254 West Centennial, spoke in support of the West M Street lprovement
project.
6. Mark Gauthier, 538 West M Street, spoke in support of West M Street improvements.
7. Shirley Gauthier, 538 West M Street, spoke in support of West M Street imJrovements.
I
8. Janet Gielow, 48 West 23rd Avenue, spoke in support of funding for the SCAR/Jasper
Mountain Rehabilitation Center for an Asset Center.
9. Mark Ripley, 571 West M Street, spoke in support of West M Street improvements.
10. Chester Pepple, 749 West M, Neighborhood Watch Coordinator, spoke ~n Jpport of West
M Street improvements.
.
11. Jerry Day, 491 West M Street, spoke in support of West M Street improvements.
I
12. Melissa Mache, 471 West M Street, spoke in support of West M Street impiovements.
I
13. Susan Barton, 595 West M, spoke in support of West M Street improvemen~s.
I
Mayor Morrisette closed the public hearing. I
I
I
Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 4
.
Councilor Walters acknowledged those who spoke during the public hearing and acknowledged
their interest in their community. He felt that Springfield needed to realize that as the City
progressed into the 20th century, the City needed paved streets. He recommended that the
neighbors who testified and other residents, attend the Springfield Tomorrow Improvement Plan
Committee meetings. He stated that they could learn about the benefits of capital bond
financing and this would provide a good forum for their input. He also stated that the
community should participate in the cost for improving the community, including paving
projects. He also stated he would like the Springfield Tomorrow Improvement Plan Committee
to review what the cost would be to pave all streets in the community. He stated that the issues
and decisions before the Council were difficult. He also stated that there were many pressing
needs for the use of Block Grant funds. He also discussed the use of dedicated funds and felt
that these particular funds should be used for needs other than paving. He did acknowledge the
needs of the community including street paving, parks and playgrounds. He was in support of
total funding for the Tyson Park Playground and Pride Park Phase III Development, in the
amount of parks in the amount of $25,000, so children would have a place to play, He also
recommended that Council fund SCAR/Jasper Mountain Rehabilitation Center for an Asset
Center, in the amount of $100,000 and $55,000 for the Catholic Community Services of Lane
County, Inc.
.
Councilor Dahlquist questioned if Council were to approve all or part of funding for the West
M Street from Rainbow Drive project, and if the financial responsibility could be tied to the
property owners. He clarified that if the owner sold the property, the City could recover the
cost that would normally have been charged, since it is policy that the property owner pay for
the street improvements.
Management Analyst Lynn Nakamura responded that when using Block Grant funds, the
assumption is that you are assisting low income homeowners, therefore, funding would be a
grant, not a loan.
Mr. Kelly clarified that through a subsidy program, funding is available from the federal .
government and there are certain substandard street projects that qualify, based on the number
of low to moderate income people that live on the street. An income verification is completed
and a floating subsidy is based on owner-occupied, rental, and income level is for the size of the
family. If it is investment property, you receive no subsidy and pay 100% of the project cost,
Mr. Kelly provided additional information regarding subsidy programs.
.
Councilor Shaver discussed the Catholic Community Services of Lane County. He stated that
this program is an excellent idea, although, they need to get further developed. He stated that
they do not have the facility. The facility they are considering is owned by the Catholic church
and the church has not yet made it officially available, nor has it been appraised. He stated
there were other organizational problems that needed to be worked out. He expected to see this
come back to Council. He explained that the CDBG funding had strengths including meeting
the needs of low income individuals. He discussed the percentage of funding used for street
paving and housing in the past. He explained that street improvements have been added to the
list through the petition process and interest of neighbors. He acknowledged the interest of
residents in support of the West M Street paving project. He talked about the difference street
improvements can make in a neighborhood. He shared history of his neighborhood and
improvements made since the street was paved. He felt the West M Street project was a classic
use of CDBG funds. He felt the paving would upgrade the neighborhood and improve interest
Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 5
.
in neighborhood safety. He discussed the importance of providing funding for the project. He
discussed the request for the additional $80,000 and explained that this funding would pave the
worst block, which was Kelly to Prescott. He stated that if Council decided to alter the CDBG
recommendations and take any amount of money from that project, they may as well take the
$80,000 because that $80,000 was for paving the additional block. He personally supported
recommendations made by the CDBG Committee. He also noted the long term benefits of this
project.
Councilor Maine acknowledged those who spoke during the public hearing and was excited
about the level of neighborhood involvement and meetings held. She did not support the entire
$180,000 funding for the M Street project, She recommended funding in the amount of
$100,000, which would provide a total allocation of$200,000 for the West M Street project.
She also suggested the neighbors request future allocation from the CDAC, as well as other
resources. She also discussed the responsibilities between public and private participation and
supported a 50/50 split. She commented on the $80,000 funding and suggested the Tyson Park
Playground and the Pride Park Phase III Development be supported. She stated that many low
to moderate income people would be served by the playground project. She supported the
funding request of $25,000 for the two projects. She also supported the .5 FTE Housing
Planner II request.
Councilor Beyer supported funding the West M Street project in the amount of $100,000. She
also stated she supported the entire proposal.
.
Councilor Burge expressed his concern for the safety of children and agreed with the need for
all streets to be paved. He also recognized the needs of neglected and abused children and felt
their needs were a priority.
Mayor Morrisette discussed the West M Street project. He would like the City to be able to
work with the neighbors and encourage their participation. He wanted these people behind the
capital bond request.
Councilor Shaver acknowledged that there were not many funding sources for street
improvements and he did support the CDAC funding recommendations.
Councilor Walters discussed the Catholic Community Services of Lane County, Inc. request.
He urged Council to consider using a portion of the $80,000 to partially fund the Catholic
Community Service request. He suggested splitting an amount between their request and the
SCAR/Jasper Mountain request.
Councilor Beyer stated that Council needed to trust recommendations made by the CDAC
Committee. She questioned when the West M Street project would be started if $ 100,000 in
funding was provided. City Engineer Al Peroutka responded that it would be on or around July
1st.
.
Councilor Maine clarified that she supported both the M Street Project and the playground
projects. She hoped the $80,000 was put on the table and asked Councilor Shaver what his
thoughts were for use ofthe $80,000 on the table.
Councilor Shaver responded that the two projects with the most support were the SCAR/Jasper
Mountain request and the Child Center request which took priority above the SCAR/Jasper
. Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 6
.
Mountain for several reasons. He explained that Pride Park was the higher of the two requests
made by Willamalane. He explained that most of the other projects did not meet the CDAC
criteria. He explained that the Catholic Community Services was a worthwhile project,
although certain funding went to social services and to purchasing a building.
Councilors Shaver and Beyer supported the $180,000 funding for the West M Street project.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR MAINE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
SHAVER, TO ALLOCATE $100,000 OF FY 95-96 CDBG FUNDING FOR THE WEST M
PROJECT FROM RAINBOW TO PRESCOTT. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE
OF 4 FOR AND 2 AGAINST (BURGE AND WALTERS).
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR MAINE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
WALTERS, THAT $15,000 BE ALLOCATED FOR TYSON PARK PLAYGROUND AND
$10,000 BE ALLOCATED FOR PRIDE PARK PHASE III DEVELOPMENT, FOR A
TOTAL OF $25,000. THE MOTION FAILED WITH A VOTE OF 3 FOR AND 4
AGAINST (SHAVER, BURGE, BEYER AND MORRISETTE).
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SHAVER, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
MAINE, TO FUND PRIDE PARK PHASE III DEVELOPMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$10,000. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 1 AGAINST (BURGE).
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, TO FUND THE .5 FTE HOUSING
PLANNER II REQUEST, WITH THE BALANCE OF THESE FUNDS TO BE
ALLOCATED TO THE SCAR/JASPER MOUNTAIN REHABILITATION CENTER FOR
AN ASSET CENTER, AND TO REDUCE HOUSING PROGRAMS. COUNCILOR
BURGE WITHDREW HIS MOTION.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
MAINE, TO FUND THE .5 FTE HOUSING PLANNER POSITION, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$23,120. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 2 AGAINST
(DAHLQUIST AND WALTERS).
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BEYER, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
SHAVER TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED WITH
A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
MAINE, TO VOTE ON THE MOTION MADE BY COUNCILOR BURGE PREVIOUSLY.
THE MOTION FAILED WITH A VOTE OF 2 FOR AND 4 AGAINST (MAINE, BEYER,
DAHLQUIST AND WALTERS).
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BEYER WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
SHAVER, THAT $50,000 BE PROVIDED TO THE CHILD CENTER, AND $12,500 TO
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR POLICE/COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP FOR
STRATEGIC PLANNING. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0
AGAINST.
Councilor Shaver said reducing Housing Rehabilitation Programs by $20,000, would eliminate
one more housing rehabilitation. He supported giving the balance of the unallocated funds,
Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 7
.
which is $46,880, to Scar/Jasper Mountain and supported giving the potential $15,000 overage
to Scar/Jasper Mountain, but would not support cutting the Housing Rehabilitation Program
more than CDAC has already reduced it.
Councilor Burge suggested including the $46,880 plus the $11,568, in the contingency fund, for
a total of approximately $58,000 to Scar/Jasper Mountain, and in addition, any proceeds or
portion of proceeds from the $15,000 overage that may be recovered.
Councilor Shaver stated a need for a contingency fund. As an example, he stated a project
could go over budget and money should be available in case this happens.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR SHAVER, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
DAHLQUIST, TO FUND THE HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM FOR $250,295,
TO THE CONTINGENCY FOR $11,568, TO FUND SCAR/JASPER MOUNTAIN FOR
$46,880, AND RETURN ANY HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM LOAN
REPAYMENTS TO THE HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM, WHICH IS
ESTIMATED TO BE $55,000 NEXT FISCAL YEAR, AND THAT THE PROCEEDS
FROM WILLAMALANE, SHOULD THERE BE ANY, BE DEDICATED TO
SCAR/JASPER MOUNTAIN, AND THAT ANY OF THE $200,000 THAT HAS NOT
BEEN NEEDED TO BE USED FOR PAVING OF M STREET ALSO BE GIVEN TO
SCAR/JASPER MOUNTAIN. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0
AGAINST.
.
Council recessed at approximately 8:45 p.m. The meeting reconvened at approximately 9:00 p.m.
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
1. Jerry Ritter, 1865 Yolanda Street, representing Neighbors United Against Annexation,
explained that the majority of residents in the UGB area did not support annexation. He had a
report with over 3,000 people who were opposed to annexation. Mr. Ritter provided Council
with a copy of the report and petition.
COUNCIL RESPONSE
1. Councilor Walters responded to comments made by Mr. Ritter and explained that an election
would provide a true sense of what the wishes of the community are regarding annexation.
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
1. Correspondence From Bonnie Snyder, Proprietor, Rumors Cabaret, 136 North 4th Street,
Responding to Allegations Regarding Liquor License Renewal Endorsement and Police
Responses to the Establishment.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
MAINE, TO ACCEPT AND FILE THE CORRESPONDENCE. THE MOTION PASSED
WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
.
BIDS
ORDINANCES
Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 8
.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL
1. Committee Appointments
a. Bicycle Committee Appointment.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR MAINE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
DAHLQUIST, TO APPOINT A. 1. ULLMANN TO THE BICYCLE COMMITTEE FOR
A THREE YEAR TERM EXPIRING MAY 1, 1998, AND TO APPOINT MICHAEL
HIGGINS AS A STANDBY MEMBER TO BE APPOINTED AUTOMATICALLY
WHEN THE NEXT OPENING OCCURRED. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE
OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
2. Business from Council
a. Evaluation of New Fire Technology.
Fire Chief Dennis Murphy presented the staff report on this issue. He commented that new
fire engine technology is now available that may significantly improve fire fighting
effectiveness and efficiency. Councilors Burge and Shaver accompanied fire personnel to
the Denver base of the manufacturer of the Raven fire engine to begin the evaluation
process.
.
The staff report summarized the trip to the Raven factory in Denver and provided options
for completing the evaluation of the process.
Option # 1 was to pursue a short term lease to complete the evaluation by putting the unit
into service. The cost for a six month lease is expected to be between $3,000 and $5,000
per month. This option would allow Fire and Life Safety staff to continue further
evaluation as soon as the lease is executed and the unit delivered. The lease would include a
termination agreement if the Raven does not perform satisfactory and an option to purchase
if it does perform as specified. Lease payments would be credited toward the purchase
price if the vehicle is purchased. Money for the lease would come from existing apparatus
replacement (Fund 13) reserves and would not require any additional expense in FY 94-95
or FY 95-96, If the unit were purchased, additional funds would be added in FY 96-97 by
increasing vehicle rent. The final purchase price would be about $161,000. Staff will
return to Council with the actual lease agreement at Council's May 15, 1995 meeting. The
City Attorney's Office will prepare the agreement.
Option #2 delays any lease until after Raven factory representatives bring a demonstration
to Springfield in late May. The cost is the same as Option #1, but the lease would begin at
a later date.
Option #3 terminates the evaluation. There would be no additional cost.
.
Mr. Murphy explained that a practice burn was scheduled for May 25 and 26th and would
provide an opportunity to test and demonstrate equipment.
Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 9
.
Councilor Shaver and Burge provided Council with a summary of their demonstration of
the Raven unit.
Councilor Burge expressed reservation in having to pay a company to demonstrate a unit.
Mr. Murphy clarified Option # 2 for the Council.
BY CONSENSUS, COUNCIL SUPPORTED OPTION #2.
b. Committee Reports
1. Mayor Morrisette reported that MWMC approved their budget at their recent meeting.
He also discussed the conflict of interest posed with Mike Gleason serving as a member
of the MWMC Board. Councilor Burge expressed concern regarding Springfield's
capacity. Council decided a letter from Council would be appropriate and directed staff
to draft a letter to the Lane County Commissioners expressing concern regarding Mr.
Gleason's participation as a Eugene representative on the MWMC.
c. Other Business
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
1. Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Bond Anticipation Notes.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-35 - A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF BOND
ANTICIPATION NOTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING
FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS; AND ESTABLISHING AND DETERMINING OTHER
MATTERS IN CONNECTION.
Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this issue. The City's local public
improvement assessment financing program is governed by both state law and the City Code.
As the Council has currently approved eleven separate projects for assessment financing and the
program is funded on a reimbursement basis through the sale of assessment bonds, there is a
need to obtain financing for the proj ects prior to their ability to be bonded in the Spring of 1996.
A sale of bond anticipation notes in the amount of $800,000 would allow all eleven projects to
be completed as scheduled and included together in one assessment bond sale in May of 1996.
The passage of the current resolution would authorize the sale and the publication of the sale.
Council was provided with a change in the resolution. Page A-I, Note Form Appendix, was
revised under Original Issue Date. It now reads June [blank], 1995.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
MAINE, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 95-35 AS AMENDED. THE MOTION PASSED
WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
2. Approval of Eugene-Springfield Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 95-36 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EUGENE-
SPRINGFIELD CONSOLIDATED PLAN FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT FOR SUBMISSION TO THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING
AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
. Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 10
.
City Planner Robin Johnson presented the staff report on this issue. The Eugene-Springfield
Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development is a new requirement of the
federal government and is necessary for Eugene and Springfield to continue receiving funding
from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. A 30 day comment period was held
between March 20, 1995 and April 19, 1995 and two public hearings have been held. The most
recent hearing was held on March 30, 1995 conducted jointly with the Intergovernmental
Housing Policy Board, the Intergovernmental Human Services Committee and the Springfield
and Eugene Community Development Advisory Committees. The Springfield Planning
Commission reviewed the document on April 18, 1995 and had no major comments. The draft
provided represents no significant policy changes.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BURGE, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
MAINE, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 95-36. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE
OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
3, AGREEMENT WITH THE OREGON RIVERS MUSEUM (ORM).
Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi presented the staff report. Council was also provided
with Attachment A of the ORM agreement. The City of Springfield has received a grant from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, for the development of the Oregon Rivers
Museum Master Plan. The proposed agreement establishes ORM as the independent contractor
responsible for completion of the Master Plan.
.
Mr. Grimaldi explained there are several key elements to the proposed agreement. They are as
follows:
1. The agreement will allow ORM to pay, with Forest Service funds, master planning expenses
incurred prior to the suspension of master planning activities by ORM. This was done in
order to avoid conducting work which is site-specific.
2. Resumption of master plan work cannot occur without city approval. At this time, staffis
recommending that master plan activities not resume until substantial progress is made in
acquiring a suitable site for the facility; matching funds needed to complete the master plan
continue to be available; and, if needed, any adjustments to the scope of work for the master
plan are approved by the City.
3. ORM will be responsible for reimbursing the City should it be determined that grant funds
were used for any ineligible purpose.
4. The City agrees to allow ORM to select the site for the facility, however, site location is
limited to the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary area.
ORM Board members present were introduced. Steve Sorseth, US Forest Service was also
present. Councilor Burge briefly reported on a recent meeting he participated in. Councilor
Walters also provided brief information regarding the ORM project. He eXplained that an audit
would be recommended in the future.
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR WALTERS, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
BURGE, TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT
.
.
.
, . ,. Council Meeting Minutes
May 1, 1995
Page 11
WITH ORM FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE OREGON RIVERS
MUSEUM MASTER PLAN. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0
AGAINST.
4. Other Business
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:47 p.m.
Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson
~~
Mayor Morrisette
Mayor
Attest:
~~.~
Eileen Stein
City Recorder