HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/21/2009 Work Session
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER2l, 2009
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225
Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, September 21,2009 at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor
Leiken presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Lundberg, Wylie, Leezer, Ralston, Simmons, and
Pishioneri. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery,
City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
1. Planning CommissioIlJ..nterYiew~
Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. The City received three (3)
applications for one vacancy during a three month recruitment process.
Ms. Sheri E. Moore resides at 1955 N. 16th Street; Springfield; and is a retired teacher with
Marcola School District.
Mr. Garold D. Ropp resides at 4691 Holden Ct. Springfield; and is employed at McKenzie D & D
Inc., as an Architect Designer.
Mr. Jonathan L. Siegle resides at 540 E Street, Springfield; and is a retired teacher with
Springfield District #19.
The Springfield Planning Commission is a seven member volunteer Commission appointed by
the City Council. The members serve four-year terms. Of the seven members, two appointments
may live outside the City limits and two appointments may be involved in the Real estate
profession. Positions are "at-large", and do not represent specific geographic areas.
Currently the Planning Commission had one member, Commissioner Moe, who lived outside the
City limits, and none that worked in Real Estate.
The Council decision to appointment was scheduled for tonight's Regular Meeting.
Mr. Grimaldi noted that Jonathan Siegle would not be available for the interview during the work
session, but had been told he could come by at 8 :OOpm and Council could interview him at that
time.
Council agreed to wait to interview him at that time.
Introductions were made to each of the candidates.
Council chose the questions they would ask of each applicant and interviewed Sheri Moore and
Garold Ropp.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 21, 2009
Page 2
Council used the following questions for each of the applicants:
1. Why do you want to continue/ to serve on the Planning Commission? (Mayor)
2. The Planning Commission generally meets two evenings each month and additional
evening meetings are sometimes necessary. There are also materials to be reviewed in
advance of these meetings that may take a couple of hours to read. Given your work
and/or family demands, can you fully participate as a Commission member? (Wylie)
3. Many of the land use laws applied by the Planning Commission are state or federally
mandated. During a Planning Commission hearing how would you reconcile your own
personal opinions with the applicant's interests when those interests do not comply with
the land use laws? (Simmons)
4. The City is currently updating all buildable lands inventories in anticipation of adopting a
new urban growth boundary for Springfield sometime in 20 10. What is your opinion
.. about balancing the need to accommodate future urban growth and preserving. farm and
forest land adjacent to the urban growth boundary? (Lundberg)
5. What roll do you think the Planning Commission should have with the revitalization of
downtown? (Ralston)
6. What is your general understanding of the relationship between the Planning Commission
and City Staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council? (Leezer)
7. How would you recommend balancing the community's need for attractive commercial
and industrial development with the rights of property owners? (Pishioneri)
Mayor Leiken thanked the applicants for taking the time to apply for the Planning Commission.
Mayor Leiken said they would deliberate after they interviewed Mr. Siegle.
(see conclusion of discussion at end of these minutes)
2. Ambulance Transport System Update.
Fire and Life Safety Chief Dennis Murphy presented the staff report on this item. The Springfield
Ambulance Fund ended FY09 in a deficit and Fund Reserves no longer existed. Increased
operating costs and decreasing revenues across the system had created a serious fmancial
challenge for Lane County ambulance services.
Since the Joint Elected Officials Ambulance Transport Summit in January 2009, a JEO Task
Force had studied the problem and identified some possible solutions. Two options were
eliminated as long-term solutions, 1) continuing to raise ambulance service rates, and 2) turning
the region's ambulance service over to the private sector.
Although many options remained, they fell into just two categories: general tax support, or the
formation of a new taxing entity that would support ambulance service.
Ambulance service systems in Eugene and Springfield service areas had historically been self-
supporting through fees for service. This was no longer possible, largely due to decreased
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 21, 2009
Page 3
reimbursements from Medicare and rising operating costs. A change in public policy could
redirect General Fund dollars away from other public services, to support the ambulance transport
system.
Creating a new tax-and-service entity was a lengthy and complicated process, requiring voter
approval to enact. Policy decisions would be needed regarding district boundaries, proposed
level of taxation, services to be provided, governance, transition, etc. before any ballot measure
could be offered to voters.
A series of nine Public Input Forums were scheduled from Sept 15th - Oct. 151 to solicit public
input on the options available.
Chief Murphy thanked Councilors Wylie and Ralston for serving on the JEO Task Force. This
was a very difficult topic with a lot of information.
Chief Murphy gave a briefhistory of the ambulance service in Springfield. He discussed the other
agencies that were provided ambulance billing services by the City of Springfield. He noted the
difficulties that the ambulance service was facing at this time, due in large part to the decrease in
reimbursement from Medicare and Medicaid.
Mayor Leiken asked for the amount of reimbursement from Medicare and Medicaid.
Chief Murphy said Medicare reimbursed $300-$450 per call and our rate was set at $1600.
Medicare was seventy percent of our patient transport volume. The decrease in reimbursement
would be cut even further in the next year. The Medicaid rate was the same as Medicare. The City
was allowed to collect a co-pay from Medicare patients, but rarely did because of the difficulty
for those patients and the low collection rate.
Councilor Wylie asked what was needed from Medicare and Medicaid to cover our costs.
Chief Murphy said it would be about $570 if everyone paid for the cost of service. He noted the
loss because of the 70% on Medicare and Medicaid.
Councilor Wylie said that needed to be relayed to the public.
Chief Murphy said the editorial in the Register Guard did address that.
Councilor Leezer asked about the percentages ofMedicarelMedicaid, FireMed, and full fares.
Chief Murphy said of the 70% MedicarelMedicaid population, about 70% were of FireMed
members. Only about 10% of FireMed members used the ambulance services. FireMed worked
and took care of its members.
Councilor Leezer asked what percentage of rides were full fare of $1600.
Chief Murphy said some portion of 17%, but those were subject to certain guidelines of how
much insurance carriers would pay and how much were co-pays, which were often difficult to
collect. He noted that there were public forums scheduled, with the fIrst public forum in
Springfield scheduled on Thursday, September 24 in the Library Meeting Room, and the next at
Fire Station #3 the following week. Several forums had already take~ place in Eugene and
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 21, 2009
Page 4
Veneta. The topics of the forum presented to the public came from the JEO Task Force: 1) using
General Fund support; and 2) formation of a new taxing entity that would support ambulance
service. Citizens so far had asked that other options be explored. He referred to the question of
using General Fund support. Citizens wanted every option explored before taxing. Public forums
were not an accurate way to poll, but gave some insight.
Councilor Pishioneri said he recalled that the Medicare rate was based on east coast numbers.
Chief Murphy said it was just a figure on what Medicare needed to cut. He did note the lower cost
in New England states due to a large number of volunteer services.
Councilor Lundberg said she was interested in hearing what citizens had to say, although she
knew forums were not scientific. She would like to see a comment card of some kind online to
get more input from the younger citizens. She hoped there would be more opportunities for
citizens to participate.
Chief Murphy noted there was information available online with survey monkey attached for
those that could not attend the meetings. They were inviting everyone from all affected
communities to all of the forums.
Councilor Ralston said it was important to note that FireMed had been self-sufficient and also
added funds to the General Fund in the past. The question was whether or not it was a core
service. If so, it should be funded by the General Fund. If we didn't have additional revenue to
support it, another revenue stream was needed. If the cost was spread over all of Lane County, the
bill would be about $40 or $50 a year for everyone. The solutions were coming down to just a
couple of options. It had been determined that service would not be reduced or turned over to a
private industry. He liked the idea of the online commentary. The Register Guard had done an
excellent job oflaying out the problem. It was important to get the public onboard. One of his key
issues was who would have control over decisions. One option would be to fold into an existing
district, but then that district would have control. The subcommittee was working on a lot of
details, and getting feedback from citizens was critical.
Chief Murphy said the task force planned on giving the elected officials a decision by December
7, unless the elected officials asked for a delay.
Councilor Wylie said the Chief had done a good job of keeping the Council informed. In the best
of all possible worlds, a metro ftre district would be created. Short of that, support was needed
from the public and the federal government. She asked if there was a contingent talking with
Congressman DeFazio and other Federal representatives about raising the Medicare and Medicaid
rates. The State of Oregon was working on a health plan, and we needed to fmd out where
ambulance rates were in that process. Ifwe could get an increase from the State and Federal
governments for Medicare and Medicaid, cities wouldn't' have to go so deep into our General
Fund. We needed to look at multiple sources of funds in the long-run. This was not something
that could be solved overnight, but we needed to be vigilant.
Chief Murphy said the fire merger and ambulance service were tied together, but it was
determined that they needed to survive independently.
Councilor Pishioneri referred to the Chiefs statement that it would be great if everyone bought
FireMed. Councilor Ralston had stated that a taxing district would cost everyone about $50. Ifnot
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
Septernber21,2009
Page 5
everyone was electing to buy FireMed, it was unlikely the public would vote to pay a tax of equal
amount. He asked what the back-up plan was if it was put to the voters and failed. He did not
believe that a taxing district would pass in this economy. The public would aSK a lot of questions
and may be reluctant.
Mayor Leiken said one of the issues was to make the case, which was the fact that the federal
government had again turned their backs on communities. He asked if Council would have
another update on this issue.
Mr. Grimaldi said staff wasn't expecting a decision tonight, but rather wanted to introduce the
topic and bring Council up to speed.
Chief Murphy noted the dates and locations of the next two forums.
Mr. Grimaldi said a work session would be scheduled prior to the December 7 joint elected
officials meeting regarding the merger.-They-ccmldincludea discussion on this topic as well and
get input from Council on the direction they would like to take.
Councilors Pishioneri and Lundberg said they were not supportive of a taxing district.
Mayor Leiken said the next step was to hear the public's input. He suggested plenty of time was
scheduled for the next discussion on this topic.
l. Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant and National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Procurement-Franklin Blvd.
Mr. Grimaldi said staff wanted to determine whether or not to go forward with the NEP A process
and let Council know what this would look like if the grant was awarded.
Mayor Leiken asked the City Attorney if there were issues if the Council took extra time in the
work session and started the regular meeting a few minutes late.
Mr. Leahy said there would be no legal issues.
Transportation Manager Tom Boyatt and Planner David Reesor presented the staff report on this
item. The City did submit a $49,500,000 TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery) grant application for federal stimulus funds to completely reconstruct
Franklin Blvd. in Glenwood by the deadline, and had received word that it had been accepted.
Mr. Reesor distributed a copy of the application. Mr. Boyatt noted that the application was very
time intensive. He acknowledged the assistance from Lane Transit District (L TD) and City staff.
A link to a site regarding the TIGER grant was on the City's webpage. TIGER grant awards were
expected in January of201O. Congressman DeFazio and Senators Wyden and Merkley also
supported funding a large portion of this same project as a High Priority Project for federal
transportation reauthorization, which may occur within the next 24 months.
If the City received TIGER grant funds for design and construction of the Franklin upgrades, the
City could begin receiving funds as soon as January 2010. However, release of TIGER grant
funds for design and construction were contingent on completion ofNEPA analysis and fmdings.
In order to proceed to construction rapidly upon receipt of a TIGER grant, the NEPA process
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 21, 2009
Page 6
must be completed by summer 2010. Given the extremely short time frame for potential grant
award, the staff recommended that the City begin the NEPA analysis by winter 2009.
Due to the tight timeframes, staff advertised a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) seeking a
qualified engineering, planning and environmental ftrm(s) capable of providing professional
engineering and environmental services to prepare a NEP A analysis and fmdings for the Project.
Staff identified $350,000 for NEPA activity using a mix of LID ($50,000), Glenwood Urban
Renewal ($200,000) and Transportation Improvement SDCs ($100,000). Current NEP A
estimates ranged from $200,000 to $500,000. Staff proposed to contract a two stage NEPA
process so that early data gathering and NEP A process identification could occur prior to the
TIGER award announcement. Then, should the City be fortunate enough to receive TIGER
funding, a decision could be made on completing the bulk ofNEP A activity, and potential gap
funding identified at that time.
<f<:':' -,'. .-------.- --., -- .----'
Although TIGER grant funds were uncertain at this point in time, the Project looked promising
. for-the-reauthonzation ofthe Federal Transportation Bill. If the City did not receive TIGERgra11t .-
funds, the City would still be required to complete the NEP A analysis in order to construct the
Project with Federal T-Bill funds.
Mr. Boyatt said if the grant was awarded, there would be a lot of work for City staff to do on this
project. He discussed the NEP A process and said it would be a two-stage contract; the ftrst for
work needed anyway; and the second to complete the process based on award of the grant.
Councilor Lundberg asked if the $200,000-$500,000 was for the entire NEP A process. Yes. She
asked which part of that amount was for the early stages.
Mr. Boyatt said about $25,000 to $50,000 and the TIGER grant wouldn't pay for that cost. The
City could still move forward even if the grant was not received.
Councilor Leezer asked if those funds were already budgeted.
Mr. Boyatt said $25,000 was budgeted in anticipation ofa NEPA study. He didn't believe there
was funding in the SDCs, and LID was not in our budget. There was project funding in the urban
renewal district.
Community Development Manager John Tamulonis said there was enough money in the urb~
renewal.budget to make adjustments to projects.
Assistant Public Works Director Len Goodwin said there were enough funds in the
Transportation SDC reserves to do a supplemental budget to cover the needed costs.
Councilor Wylie said the I-5 Bridge project had to do a lot of environmental assessments. She
asked ifthey would also be doing a NEP A process.
Mr. Boyatt said they did go through an Environmental Assessment (EA). One of the things that
strengthened our application was that the project was on flat ground in an existing transportation
corridor. The EA done by L TD for the fIrst phase of the EmX line would be helpful. They would
be using that information as they could.
Councilor Wylie said that could provide some savings.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 21,2009
Page 7
Mr. Boyatt said they were proud of their application and were getting good feedback. They were
limited to twenty-five pages and that was the length of their application. There was no form, but
rather certain items to be addressed.
Councilor Pishioneri asked how many of the anticipated job increases were pre-existing and
preserved government jobs versus private enterprise jobs.
Mr. Boyatt said he did not have that information. That statement came from the Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) as a co-applicant. He was not sure if it differentiated
between preserved or added jobs, but said he could get that answer.
Councilor Pishioneri said he would like to see information by the State regarding local builders.
He referred to the project on I-5 that he understood had local contractors who had subcontracted
with businesses outside the local area. He asked if the City had anything in place that could
. maximize using local business.- .--- ----- --- . .. - ---- _.u .-- _.
Mr. Boyatt said he did not believe we did for this project. Part of the challenge was the time
frames they were given with the stimulus funds which didn't allow us time to put programs such
as that into place. It would be contracted through Federal contracting requirements.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if there was something we could do internally or if we were
prohibited now that the application was submitted.
Mr. Boyatt said we were not prohibited from doing anything.
Mr. Grimaldi said staff could explore that further.
Mayor Leiken asked if February 2010 was when we would find out if we were awarded the grant.
Mr. Boyatt said the latest was that we would know in January, but that date could change.
Mayor Leiken asked if the Obama administration had talked about pushing back the
reauthorization.
Mr. Boyatt said that could come in up to two years too late. He discussed that further.
The meeting was recessed at 7:06 p.m.
The meeting was reconvened at 8:09 p.m.
Mayor Leiken noted that Mr. Siegle had not yet arrived for his interview.
Councilor Wylie asked why Ms. Moore was only appointed for two years on a four year
appointment.
Councilor Leezer said there were three positions that became vacant at once, so they staggered
the terms. One of the positions was appointed for a four year term, one for a three year term, and
Ms. Moore was appointed for a two year term.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 21, 2009
Page 8
Councilor Wylie said considering that and considering Ms. Moore's energy and qualities, she was
interested in re-appointing her.
Councilor Simmons said Ms. Moore had done an excellent job. He would support reappointment.
Councilor Ralston said the City was fortunate to have such good applicants. He knew Mr. Ropp
and had talked to him about this position. He felt he would be very good on this commission. He
agreed that there was a steep learning curve and he would prefer to stick with experience at this
time. He thought Mr. Ropp would make a very good commissioner for a future vacancy. At this
time, he supported reappointing Ms. Moore.
Councilor Lundberg said she agreed with the Councilors' comments. She liked diversity of
perspectives on all of our boards or committees and Ms. Moore had a perspective that was
reflective ofthe citizenry. She had a good questioning mind and it would be good to allow her to
put that acquired background to work.
Councilor Leezer said she had worked with Ms. Moore on the Planning Commission and felt she
brought good questions and went beyond in her researching. With the work on the urban growth
boundary (VGB), it was important to have someone that was up to speed on the commission.
Councilor Pishioneri said Ms. Moore was experienced and qualified.
Consensus was to re-appoint Ms. Moore to the Planning Commission.
Mr. Grimaldi said staff could bring this to Council for formal approval at the next Council
meeting on October 5.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned 8:13 p.m.
Minutes Recorder - Amy Sowa
Attest:
a~
Amy SOWi
City Reco oer