HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/04/2009 Regular
City of Springfield
Regular Meeting
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, MAY 4, 2009
The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, May 4, 2009 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Ralston, Lundberg, Wylie, Leezer, and Pishioneri.
Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City
Attorney Bill Van Vactor, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Leiken.
Mayor Leiken asked for a moment of silence in honor of Councilor John Woodrow who passed
away April 28.
Mayor Leiken offered time for Council and staff to remember Councilor Woodrow.
Each of the Councilors spoke of their admiration and respect for Councilor Woodrow.
Mayor Leiken said Councilor Woodrow was a true gentleman and a good man. He made a very
positive impact during his 12 years in Springfield.
Mr. Grimaldi noted that Councilor Woodrow was a true leader and a friend.
SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT
1. ALS Awareness Month Proclamation.
Mayor Leiken read from the proclamation and declared May ALS Awareness Month in
Springfield, Oregon. He introduced Joe Boyd, District Director from the Muscular Dystrophy
Association (MDA) and presented him with the proclamation.
Mr. Boyd said this was a great honor and he thanked the Mayor for proclaiming Mayas ALS
Awareness Month. This year was the 70th anniversary of Lou Gehrig's farewell speech at Yankee
Stadium. He noted a couple of occasions where the MDA had been recognized locally. On
Friday, May 8, Dutch Brothers Coffee would be donating all oftheir net proceeds to MDA to
fund ALS research.
Councilor Pishioneri said he had lost his brother-in-law to ALS. It was a very serious disease.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 2
CONSENT CALENDAR
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCil-OR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCil-OR
LUNDBERG TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED
WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
1. Claims
2. Minutes
a. April 13, 2009 - Work Session
b. April 20, 2009 - Work Session
c. April 20, 2009 - Regular Meeting
d. April 27, 2009 - Work Session
3. Resolutions
4. Ordinances
5. Other Routine Matters
ITEMS REMOVED
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Please limit comments to 3 minutes. Request to speak cards are available
at both entrances. Please present cards to City Recorder. Speakers may
not yield their time to others.
1. Liquor License Endorsements for the Renewal Period of 2009-20 1 O.
Assistant Community Services Manager Jackie Murdoch presented the staff report on this item.
The attached list of 155 businesses will likely be applying to the Development Services
Department for their 2009-2010 liquor license endorsements prior to June 30, 2009.
On December 19, 1994, Council approved Ordinance No. 5768 that established specific criteria to
be used when reviewing an application for a liquor license endorsement. Council may
recommend denial based upon reliable, factual information as it relates to any of the criteria listed
in Section 7.302 of the Springfield Municipal Code.
Some of the required information for liquor license renewal, Le., ownership ofthe establishment,
cannot be determined until staff receives the actual application. However, some determination
about meeting the listed criteria can be made now since the criteria relates to the level of police
activity associated with the establishment.
The public hearing this evening is scheduled for Council to receive community testimony relative
to the liquor license renewal endorsement. At the conclusion of the public hearing, Council is
requested to provide one of the following recommendations to the Oregon Liquor Control
Commission for the license renewal of the listed establishments: I.Grant; 2. No
Recommendation; 3. Do Not Grant Unless (applicant demonstrates commitment to overcome
listed concerns); or 4. Deny.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 3
The renewals for five downtown establishments have not been included in this packet. These
establishments are: Club 420, Stables Country Bar, The Brick House, Bright Oak Meats and
Jim's Landing. The City has requested an extension of forty-five (45) days from OLCC in order
to consider whether or not to make an unfavorable recommendation on the respective applications
due to the problems identified during the July 7, 2008 public hearing for a liquor license
endorsement at 535 Main Street.
Councilor Ralston clarified that a motion to approve would not include the five downtown
businesses.
Ms. Murdoch said because those five businesses had been removed, there was no need to make a
recommendation on those. Staff would bring those five back for a public hearing at a later date.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if those businesses that were being delayed were the top five on page
2 of Attachment 2.
Mr. Grimaldi said they were listed in the last paragraph of the agenda item summary (AIS).
Councilor Pishioneri referred to the calls for service and asked why the Dari Mart on B Street was
not included in those being delayed.
Chief Smith first thanked Council for recognizing Councilor Woodrow tonight. His passing was a
loss and he would be missed. Regarding Councilor Pishioneri's question about Dari Mart, the
City was taking a look at the downtown bars before offering a recommendation to the Council.
The Dari Mart was beyond the 500 feet from the school. Also, they were looking at the
downtown area and the Main Street strip and calls for service. Dari Mart was not included. Calls
for service had been examined as well.
Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing.
No one appeared to speak.
Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
LUNDBERG TO GRANT THE LIQUOR LICENSES FOR RENEWAL. THE MOTION
PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
2. Fiscal Year 2009-2010 One- Year Action Plan of the Eugene-Springfield Consolidated Plan
for Housing and Community Development (City of Springfield Section).
Housing Manager Kevin Ko presented the staff report on this item. In May of 2005, the Cities of
Eugene and Springfield submitted to HUD a five-year Consolidated Plan for Housing and
Community Development, effective July 1, 2005 and expiring June 30, 2010. One-Year Action
Plans must be submitted to HUD prior to the beginning of each fiscal year as amendments to the
five-year Consolidated Plan, and are designed to indicate how communities intend to fulfill the
priorities established in the Consolidated Plan. This is the fifth and [mal One- Year Action Plan
under the current Consolidated Plan.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 4
The FY2009-2010 One-Year Action Plan is based on estimated CDBG and HOME program
allocations. The actual amounts of the allocations to the City of Springfield have not yet been
determined by HUD.
The City of Springfield receives Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds as an
entitlement community and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds as a
participant in a HOME consortium agreement with the City of Eugene. CDBG funds are awarded
to communities who carry out community development activities directed towards neighborhood
revitalization, economic development, and the provision of improved community facilities and
services. HOME funding is a housing block grant program allocated to communities to be used
for housing rehabilitation, new construction, acquisition and tenant based rental assistance
activities. A public hearing was held on April 20, 2009, to review and consider six applications
for CDBG or HOME funding. Council approved funding for all six projects.
The FY2009-201O One Year Action Plan includes the CDBG and HOME funding allocations for
projects and activities and must be approved by both the City of Springfield and City of Eugene
prior to submission to HUD. The public comment period for the City of Springfield section of
the document concludes with the public hearing on May 4, 2009.
The City of Eugene section of the Plan is being adopted separately by the Eugene City Council.
The combined Eugene-Springfield One-Year Action Plan will be submitted to HUD for review
and acceptance on or before May 15,2009.
Mr. Ko provided some updates regarding [mal figures for allocations. On Thursday the City
received the final figures: CDBG $612,975 (increase of$7994 over last year); and HOME
$469,261 (increase of $47,940 over last year). He also noted that there was part ofthe Stimulus
Package called CDBG-R which was an economic development addition to the CDBG Program.
The City was anticipating receiving $164,202 from that. It would be treated similar to CDBG,
except for the reporting part. Once the City received the documentation for that, he would make
another report to Council.
Mr. Ko said last Fall he reported to Council on the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP).
He was still waiting for [mal agreements to come to the City. He attended a conference in Salem
regarding this program and it seemed that everything was moving forward.
Mr. Ko said the Council packet included the One Year Action Plan, Springfield Section. Eugene
was going through the same process for their section.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if the plan was the same as in Eugene.
Mr. Ko said Eugene went through the same process for their funds and it was a similar plan.
Eugene would be telling their Council the types of activities their funds would be used for. Their
expenditures would be different from Springfield's.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if there was work being done in Glenwood with these funds.
Mr. Ko said the CDBG funds were eligible to be used in Glenwood, but not the HOME funds.
Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 5
No one appeared to speak.
Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCil-OR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCil-OR
LUNDBERG TO APPROVE THE SPRINGFIELD SECTION OF THE FY2009-2010
ONE-YEAR ACTION PLAN. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0
AGAINST.
COUNCIL RESPONSE
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
1. Rick Dancer, 37170 Camp Creek, Springfield, OR Mr. Dancer said he was here to speak to
Council as a resident of incorporated Springfield who supported the .02 per gallon gas tax. He
was a member of the political action committee (PAC) working to pass this tax. He noted that
the Register Guard supported this tax. As he talked with people, they backed the tax once it
was explained where the $20 a year would go. They understood that they couldn't, as a
community, wait for the State and Federal dollars to fix our problems, just as when we
needed a jail, we built it. He complimented the Council for their commitment to street
maintenance. Since joining the PAC, he had learned a lot about streets and he appreciated
Council's strong leadership that put streets as a priority in this community. It was not easy to
do in tough times, but Springfielder's would see a big payoff when it was all over. He
thanked the Council for listening to the people of Springfield and not going forward with the
.04 gallon tax, but going to the .02 gallon tax. They listened, and that's what we needed more
civic leaders to do. The key to passing this measure was education. People often saw the
word tax and put a 'no' vote. The PAC needed the Council support, help in educating the
community, and help raising money to get the word out. Anything the Council could do to
publicly support it or tell people where they were with this would be very helpful. He referred
to the mailout from the Oregon Petroleum Association (OPA). The mailout said passage of
this tax was "making the Springfield tax the highest City or County tax in the state".
Springfield's tax would be equal to Eugene's ifthis passed. The mail out also stated "is it fair
to the residents of Springfield that big trucks would not help pay for the roads that they used".
Big trucks would pay a share of this tax for the roads that they used very little. Most trucking
companies that did use the program already in place were right off the highway and were
usually driving on major highways. They were buying $60,000 worth of gas a month in our
community and driving it somewhere else. That should be publicly explained to people so
they would understand. The PAC needed help and some funds getting the word out because
ballots were in people's hands. He wanted them to know this was important and Springfield
was doing things right. The fact the Council let the citizens decide was appreciated.
Mayor Leiken said he knew the mailer from OP A was coming out.
Mr. Grimaldi said a factual piece of information that was missing was that people outside of the
area travelling through Springfield bought gasoline and their tax dollars would go to support our
streets.
Mayor Leiken referred to the reduced rate paid by trucking companies. It was Gary Reed (owner
of a trucking company) who felt the trucking companies should pay a share of the tax. He also
acknowledged Mr. Reed and former Councilor Tammy Fitch for their work on that program.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 6
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
BIDS
1. Bid Award for Project P21022: Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation 2009 Basin 19C.
Civil Engineer Jeff Paschall presented the staff report on this item. Six bids were received on this
sanitary sewer rehabilitation project. Contract award is now necessary to enable work to proceed.
This project is the fifth of nine contracts that are part of the larger sanitary sewer rehabilitation
project which will complete the remaining work outlined in the Wet Weather Flow Management
Plan (WWFMP). These rehabilitation projects protect the City's investment in the wastewater
collection system assets, prevent overflows of and public exposure of raw sewage, and implement
the City's obligations under State laws and an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
compliance order. All nine projects are on a fast track to be completed by December 31, 2009.
The timing has been beneficial to the City due to a currently advantageous bidding climate.
The following bids were received and opened on April 23, 2009:
Engineer's Estimate
Harold Primrose Excavating, LLC.
CPM Development Corporation
Landis & Landis Construction
Emery and Sons Construction, LLC
K & R Plumbing Construction Company
Wildish Construction Company
$1,182,682.80
$966,647.69
$991,022.00
$1,014,673.50
$1,075,201.00
$1,082,159.00
$1,380,267.00
Harold Primrose Excavating, LLC is the low bidder on this project. Sufficient funds exist
through the recent sale of Wastewater Revenue Bonds and Supplemental Budget 3 to recognize
funding in the construction project account 850207 to allow award of the contract.
Mr. Paschall said this was actually the 5th of seven bids, as two would be designed in house.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCil-OR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCil-OR
LUNDBERG TO AWARD THE SUBJECT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT P21022 (BASIN
19C) TO HAROLD PRIMROSE EXCAVATING, LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$966,647.69. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ORDINANCES
1. Amend the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) to Include a
New Safe Harbor Population Projection for the City of Springfield.
ORDINANCE NO.1 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
AND PURPOSE SECTION OF THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA
GENERAL PLAN BY ADDING A POPULATON FORECAST FOR THE CITY OF
SPRINGFIELD FOR THE PERIOD 2010-2030 AND ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 7
Planning Manager Greg Mott distributed an email received from Matt Laird, Lane County Land
Management Division Manager, regarding the Portland State University (PSU) Population
Forecast.
Mr. Mott spoke regarding Councilor Woodrow and the many golf tournaments they had
participated in together. He was scheduled to play in a tournament with Councilor Woodrow this
Saturday. He said the difference between Councilor Woodrow and a lot of folks was that he
understood the difference between opinions and conviction. It was always a pleasure working
with Councilor Woodrow on the Council.
Mr. Mott presented the staff report on this item. The City must have a population forecast in order
to adopt an urban growth boundary. The safe harbor methodology, based on the current forecast
prepared by the state Office of Economic Analysis (EOA), may be adopted into the Metro Plan
unilaterally by the City of Springfield as provided in ORS 195.034 and 197.304. '
At the April 6, 2009 public hearing on this matter the Council honored a request from the Board
of Commissioners to leave the written record open for two weeks. During that period the Board
and Ms. Mia Nelson submitted testimony opposing the City's proposed safe harbor population
forecast. Both parties raised several arguments why the City should not proceed with this action.
Please refer to Attachment 2 to examine these objections and Attachment 3 for the city's
response.
Under normal circumstances, the Board's request to postpone adoption would be an easy
accommodation. However, we are under a time constraint to complete our obligations under
HB3337 by December 31,2009 and we therefore must use safe harbor and must use the current
published OEA forecast. To date, PSU has only prepared a draft, not final report; PSU has not
disaggregated the urban transition population for the two cities; and we cannot predict how long
the other cities and Lane County will need to complete this process thereby enabling Springfield
to co-adopt the new figure. Timing issues aside, we are confident our figures are very close; in
fact PSU's city-only projection is 735 higher than our safe harbor projection; however, PSU is
estimating the total area outside the two cities but inside the current Metro UGB will have 7,167
fewer people than our safe harbor calculation for this same area. We don't know how PSU will
allocate this population, but if the allocation is consistent with its 2030 city limits projections, the
PSU and our safe harbor projections for 2030 will be almost identical; if this proves true, the
Council can adopt the County's coordinated figure for Springfield as soon as the number becomes
final even if the safe harbor forecast is adopted now in order to comply with the time lines of HB
3337.
Mr. Mott said the email he distributed was in response to his question of whether or not PSU
would be doing a forecast for the area between the City limits and the urban growth boundary
(UGB). Mr. Laird responded that was not in the contract, mainly because there was only one
UGH. Until Eugene and Springfield created their own UGB's, there was no basis to project that
population. Mr. Mott said he didn't agree with that statement. Springfield couldn't go forward
with our project without the forecast in the area outside City limits, otherwise it would be an
inaccurate projection of what would be in our jurisdiction and responsibility to administer. Sooner
or later, Lane County would have to perform that portion of the forecast in order to fulfill their
obligations under the coordinated population forecast responsibility, so he was not sure why they
were not choosing to do it at this time. We already knew where part of that boundary existed,
which was up and down I-5. Everything east ofI-5 would be our responsibility and the
assumption was that the future population, as noted in the Safe Harbor document, would reside
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 8
east ofI-5 and inside our UGH. Staff was comfortable that we had proceeded correctly and that
the population in the Safe Harbor of 82,616 was reasonably accurate. There was a very small
difference between the two projections, but it was impossible to be accurate about what the
population would be in twenty years. Based on the past, we had a reasonable range and staff
believed the Safe Harbor methodology provided that reasonable range. PSU's figures were about
one-half of one percent of what the City projected. Staff believed that when PSU was tasked with
completing the forecast, the figures would be very close and would make no difference in our
planning. Figures generally changed in three to five years.
Mr. Mott noted that the City's relationship with Lane County was a fact and a need. He would
suggest Council delay this two more weeks to May 18. He and Mayor Leiken would be making a
presentation to the Board of Commissioners on Wednesday, May 6 and would suggest during that
presentation that the City go forward with the Safe Harbor figure, adopting it on May 18 without
compromising what they were doing so we could get going and complete our work on the UGH.
When Lane County was finished with the population forecast from PSU, probably sometime next
year, the City could readopt our population forecast based on their results. Springfield would be
obligated to do that anyway at some point. Currently staff thought the difference was minimal.
Mayor Leiken said he concurred with Mr. Mott. Springfield needed Lane County to move
forward. It had been one year since Lane County took over. the population forecast. He asked if
there was a date the City needed to make sure this was adopted.
Mr. Mott said in order to have the Lane County and Springfield Planning Commissions conduct
public hearings on our inventories for the UGB on September 15, the City needed to send our
amendments to DLCD 45 days prior to that hearing. Staff was targeting sending that packet to
DLCD by July 21. The County was dealing with ten cities plus rural residents and he did not see
them having their population figures adopted by July.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCil-OR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCil-OR
LUNDBERG TO DELAY ACTION ON THIS ITEM FOR TWO WEEKS UNTIL MAY 18,
2009. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL
1. Committee Appointments
2. Business from Council
a. Committee Reports
1. Councilor Ralston reported on the Joint Elected Officials (JEO) Ambulance
Transport Summit (ATS) meeting that he attended on Monday, April 27 with
Councilor Woodrow. They were starting to get good information. They spent nearly
two hours of the meeting going through the potential solutions that were presented.
He described some of those solutions: Rate increase, which had already been done in
Springfield, but would not likely be done in the rural areas and Eugene;
Consolidating/merging departments, which would be a short-term fix; Creating an
ambulance service district, which could be the best solution in the long-run, although
could have some compression issues; Creating a fire district, which received full
support; Continuing lobbying efforts; Reconfiguring the ASA boundaries; Full
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 9
privatization, which they determined was not feasible; Develop new membership
initiative programs; and Mobile health service. He said he would keep the Council
abreast of results. Mayor Leiken would attend future meetings in Councilor
Woodrow's place.
,
2. Mayor Leiken provided an update on the transportation bill. 1000 Friends of Oregon
had instituted what they called a Climate Change Initiative, but it would only affect
Portland Metro, Eugene/Springfield MPC and SalemlKeizer MPO. The issue was not
whether or not it would have a positive or negative effect on climate change, but that
it affected the MPO' s themselves. This could do the reverse of the intention because
it would institute so many regulations on the MPO's, that people in smaller cities
around the metro areas would grow and have to drive longer distances to their jobs in
the metro area. He noted that not every city in the Portland Metro area was pleased
with this bill. This initiative was written into the bill as it was. Springfield was
working with the League of Oregon Cities (LOC). There may be a group of
municipal elected officials going to testify, especially from the three areas that were
opposed to this initiative. Results of the initiative could be detrimental to the
intention.
Councilor Lundberg asked for the number of the bill.
Staff would confirm the bill number and provide it to Councilor Lundberg.
Mr. Grimaldi said it had left the committee and was with Ways and Means.
Mayor Leiken said the initiative could be very misleading as a climate change
initiative. He appreciated the direction he had received from Assistant Public Works
Director Len Goodwin and Transportation Manager Tom Boyatt.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
I. Booth Kelly Tenant Applications for Temporary Rent Relief.
Property Management Coordinator De Little presented the staff report on this item. Greenbrier
Rail Services is seeking temporary rent relief for one year in order to allow it to continue
operating at Booth Kelly. Unfavorable economic conditions have severely impacted the railcar
services nationwide. Greenbrier currently pays rent in the amount of$15,642.40 ("Triple Net").
Greenbrier is asking the City to allow it to defer $5,000 a month, commencing April 1, 2009 and
continuing for a period of 12 months, with the amount deferred to be added to its normal rent
after that one year. If approved, commencing April 1, 2010, Greenbrier's monthly rent would be
$20,642.40 for the next successive twelve months.
Northwest Door & Sash is experiencing similar financial stress and also wishes to maintain its
operation and employees at Booth Kelly. The company's request is to have its current monthly
rent of$6,653.00 reduced to 3,327.00 for a period of not less'than 12 months, at which time the
City would review the company's circumstances to determine whether the reduced payment
should be extended. At the conclusion of the reduced rent period, Northwest Door & Sash would
resume its full rent of $6,653 and commence rent increases of five percent annually until all
revenue reductions are recovered by the City. The Council needs to understand that since the
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 4, 2009
Page 10
NW Door and Sash lease is a month-to-month tenancy, there is no guarantee that the dollars
would ever be recovered since the Tenant could terminate at any time.
The proposal for economic relief would represent a win-win for the City as well as Greenbrier
Rail Services and Northwest Door & Sash. The City would continue to receive rent, the
warehouse spaces would remain occupied (since it is most unlikely new tenants could be attracted
at this time) and both companies could stay in operation and serve the local community with
family wage jobs.
Mayor Leiken thanked Ms. Little for staying on top of this.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCil-OR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCil-OR
LUNDBERG TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE THE
REQUESTS. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
Mr. Grimaldi reminded the Mayor and Council that the Budget Committee was meeting
tomorrow, Tuesday, May, with the SEDA Budget Committee starting at 5:30pm. Dinner would
be served.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:00 p.m.
Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa
Attest:
a ~
City Rec~r