Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/19/2009 Regular City of Springfield Regular Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, OCTOBER 19,2009 The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, October 19,2009 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Ralston, Lundberg, Wylie, Leezer, Simmons and Pishioneri. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy Sowa, and members of the staff. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Leiken. SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT 1. Employee Recognition: Brenda Jones, 15 Years of Service. City Manager Gino Grimaldi introduced Brenda Jones, Administrative Specialist and Planning Secretary, and recognized her for her 15 years of service with the City of Springfield. He noted some of Ms. Jones' accomplishments during her cl;lfeer with the City. Mr. Grimaldi said Ms. Jones helped to make the Planning Division look great through her work and organization. Ms. Jones said the City of Springfield had been a wonderful place to work. 2. Employee Recognition: Len Goodwin, 15 Years of Service. City Manager Gino Grimaldi introduced Len Goodwin, Assistant Public Works Director and recognized him for his 15 years of service with the City of Springfield. He discussed Mr. Goodwin's accomplishments during his years of service. Mr. Goodwin thanked the Mayor and Council for their service and for allowing him and staff to do their jobs. It was an honor to work for the City and its citizens. Mayor Leiken acknowledged both Ms. Jones and Mr. Goodwin for their service. He noted the vahiab1e knowledge and working relationship Mr. Goodwin had with LOC staff and State legislators that had helped the City of Springfield in many ways. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19,2009 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT). 1. Claims 2. Minutes a. September 14,2009 - JEO Meeting b. September 14,2009 - Work Session c. September 21, 2009 - Work Session d. September 21, 2009 - Regular Meeting e. September 28, 2009 - Work Session f. October 12,2009 - Work Session 3. Resolutions a. RESOLUTION NO. 09-36 - A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT PERMIT PROJECT P30494, EVANS, SOUTH nND STREET IMPROVEMENTS. b. RESOLUTION NO. 09-37 - A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT PERMIT PROJECT P30514, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR QUINAL T SUBDIVISION. c. RESOLUTION NO. 09-38 - A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT PERMIT PROJECT P30537, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR 3RD AND S STREET, ST. VINCENT DE PAUL. d. RESOLUTION NO. 09-39 - A RESOLUTION SUPPLEMENTING RESOLUTION NO. 08-47 AND AUTHORIZING THE INSTITUTION OF A PROCEEDING IN EMINENT DOMAIN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY INTEREST FOR THE GATEWAYIBELTLINEPROJECT, CITY OF SPRINGFIELD PROJECT NO. P20474 AND THE IMMEDIATE POSSESSION OF PROPERTY. 4. Ordinances a. ORDINANCE NO. 6246 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE- SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN TEXT, CHAPTER III. SECTION D, POLICY # 11: ADOPTING AN EXCEPTION TO STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 15 WILLAMETTE RIVER GREENWAY: ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE: AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 5. Other Routine Matters a. Acceptance ofthe Financial Reports for June 30, 2009. b. Award Contract to Willamette Community Health Solutions DBA, Cascade Health Solutions for Springfield Municipal Jail Inmate Medical and Dental Services. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 3 c. Approval ofthe ErnX Project Pioneer Parkway Lighting Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Springfield and Lane Transit District and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Agreement on Behalf of the City. d. Allow Construction Activities Outside of the Hours of7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. with Conditions as Described in Attachment 1 for Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation 2009 Basin 19C on 14th Street near G Street. 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. Weyerhaeuser McKenzie Nature Reserve Conveyance of Real Property to McKenzie River Trust Subject to Conditions for Protection of Conservation Values. Environmental Services Manager Ron Bittler presented the staff report on this item. The Deed, subject to conditions for protection of conservation values, helped to implement the preservation zone of the Management Plan for the Weyerhaeuser McKenzie Nature Reserve Agreement entered into by the City, Willamalane, and McKenzie River Trust for the 85 acres of property donated by Weyerhaeuser Company in 1993. It also carried out the "Environmental Stewardship" and "site uses and management" portions of the City's adopted "Master Plan" for the area. The McKenzie River Trust would receive title to certain property within the preservation zone. The McKenzie River Trust would be responsible for maintaining conservation values in the preservation zone including forest values, side channels, McKenzie reach, wetlands, stormwater and education. The Trust assumed all financial responsibility and was required to defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from their actions on the property. Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing. 1. Joe Moll, Executive Director of McKenzie River Trust, 1245 Pearl Street, Eugene, OR. Mr. Moll referred to the questions from the Council that were brought up during the previous work session. McKenzie River Trust looked at this property as providing good fish and wildlife habitat benefits as well as good water quality protection. They were looking forward to working with City staff and other partners on the joint policy toward producing Total Maximum Daily Pollutant Loads (TMDL's). In those situations, when the City sponsored or funded projects that qualified for those TMDL's, it only made sense the City retained those credits. Part of the agreement included education and outreach for the site. The primary goal for this property was the protection of fish and wildlife habitat and water quality; therefore it was not an appropriate site to have a lot of people coming frequently. He referred to land access and said they would not be monitoring the area frequently, but if they found there were signs of camping or damage, they would step in to try to do something. The Council goals for the next five years included both economic development and preservation oflivability and environmental quality. This was the kind of site that fit well with the vision of McKenzie City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19,2009 Page 4 River Trust, McKenzie Watershed Council, and the City. Their vision was to see economic development and environmental quality looked at together. 2. Larry Six, McKenzie Watershed Council, Eugene, OR. Mr. Six said one of the priority goals of the Watershed Council was protection and restoration offish and wildlife habitat. They had worked with the McKenzie River Trust, EWEB, and the Oregon Department ofFish and Wildlife (ODFW) since 2005 to identify the prime area ofthe lower McKenzie for conservation and restoration of fish and wildlife habitat. Their habitat team had selected five prime areas to set aside for those benefits and the Springfield oxbow was one of those areas, and was a key piece in their effort. They hoped the conveyance was adopted so they could move forward. 3. George Grier, 1342 'is 66th Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Grier thanked the Springfield staff and especially Mr. Leahy who had worked on this item for many years. Mr. Grier said he was the president of the McKenzie River Trust when this project originated. It was a great example of the partnership that could occur in the community to address these important issues. He thanked the City for persisting. Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing. Councilor Lundberg said kids didn't get enough of a chance to get outdoors, and she didn't want kids to miss opportunities to learn to appreciate and help enhance what we had. She would like to encourage educational opportunities, even to understand there were places people shouldn't go and disturb. It would be up to the next generation to take care of these places. It was important to get the message out to the community regarding these treasured sites. Councilor Pishioneri asked if this site was in city limits. It had never been in the city limits. Councilor Pishioneri asked about the navigable waters access and if that would still be maintained. He would like something written in the agreement regarding public access and damage. Mr. Leahy said the navigability issue was covered by State law. Any property owner that went beyond that was going to be a good steward of their property, so that was also taken care of by State law. There wouldn't be anyone living on the property, so any damage would be discovered after the fact. We would want McKenzie River Trust to step in if there was an issue. The issue of someone pulling up and camping on the site would be covered under State law for trespassing. Councilor Pishioneri asked if McKenzie River Trust had a policy regarding working with law enforcement. Mr. Moll said they were limited to a practice rather than a policy. There had been no issues regarding illicit activity during the five years that he had been there. Their practice would be to work immediately with the State patrol or other appropriate patrol. They would suggest that once McKenzie River Trust took ownership of the property, they would work on a management plan for this site in which they could include dealing with access. A management plan would have City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19,2009 Page 5 flexibility. He would want the Watershed Council and other city representatives at the table when having that discussion. Councilor Leezer said there were things in the agreement that needed to be maintained. She asked how often the City would be checking to make sure the conditions were being met. Mr. Moll said that would be up to the City. The Council representation on the McKenzie Watershed Council would be the best conduit and he would also like to come back to Council to report on their progress. Mr. Leahy said it would also be a department decision based on resources. They would have to put in on their workplan and get back to Council with some times. Mayor Leiken said having this property go to the McKenzie River Trust was a real opportunity. He thanked them for working with the City on this project and for answering the questions of the Council. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO APPROVE CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN CITY PROPERTY IN WEYERHAEUSER MCKENZIE NATURE RESERVE TO MCKENZIE RIVER TRUST FOR THE PROTECTION OF CONSERVATION VALVES. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). 2. Deferral of Collections of Fees and Adjustments to Systems Development Charges. Mr. Towery noted that Andrea Fogue from the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) recently told him that Mr. Goodwin was one of her favorite people and a great asset on Telecom issues. RESOLUTION NO. 09-40 - A RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD TO STIMULATE AND ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL HOUSING STARTS, TEMPORARILY AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 08-27, THE AMENDED MASTER SCHEDULE OF MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES, RATES, PERMITS, AND LICENSES ADOPTED THE 1 ST DAY OF JULY, 2008, AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION 09-02, ADOPTED THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2009, PROVIDING FOR DEFERRAL OF FEES AND CHARGES AT THE REQUEST OF THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR HOUSING STARTS DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS RESOLUTION THROUGH MARCH 1. 2010, EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION DATES OF ORDINANCE 6233 AND ORDINANCE 6234, AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE RESOLUTION NO. 09-41 - A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 09-04 AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE RESOLUTION NO. 09-42 - A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A LOCAL WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 09-04 AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 6 RESOLUTION NO. 09-43 - A RESOLUTION MODIFYING AND EXTENDING THE PROGRAM OF DISCOUNTED SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGES IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ORDINANCE NO. 6247 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6233 (SPECIAL) AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL TO STIMULATE AND ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF SINGLE F AMIL Y OR DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL HOUSING STARTS, AND SPECIFICALLY AMENDING AND CLARIFYING THE ASSESSMENT FOR A DEFERRED CHARGE OR FEE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Assistant Public Works Director Len Goodwin presented the staff report on this item. Council directed staff to continue the program of deferral of collection of certain. fees until final occupancy, to continue to delay an increase in certain Transportation System Development Charges (SDC) and provide for an increase in certain Local Wastewater SDCs, as well as continue the program of SDC discounts for development in the downtown area. Council reviewed proposed adjustments to the current development incentives and directed staff to return with resolutions to implement those proposals. The City Recorder distributed two documents from Mr. Goodwin: the first, a graph showing the Springfield Housing Starts as a Percentage ofMSA Starts; and the second, an Alternatives Analysis Local Wastewater SDC Rate. Mr. Goodwin thanked the HomeBuilders' Association (HBA) and noted that staff and the HBA had been able to work collaboratively to try to fmd solutions, even though they had differing recommendations. He discussed the purpose for the proposed increases and deferrals. The City's local wastewater system was challenged due to the need to make improvements. He noted the lack of funds the City had been able to collect from SDCs for those improvements. Mr. Goodwin explained the two documents that were distributed. These documents were for Council's information as they deliberated on this issue following public comment. Staff's view was that the City must move forward to try to increase the amount of revenue the SDC generated over the next several months. Even if they met the target, the City would still be facing large increases in user rates next year. Ifthey couldexceed the target, there could be ways those funds could be used to indirectly affect user rates. Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing. 1. Laura Potter, HomeBui1ders' Association of Lane County, 2053 Laura Street, Springfield, OR. Ms. Potter thanked staff for their hard work and willingness to work with the HBA on this issue. She had served on the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) on this issue last year and staff always provided information, addressed concerns, and provided concrete examples. These were difficult issues. The City of Springfield had real projects to consider and real bonds to payoff and were limited in revenue sources by the State of Oregon's taxing system and depended on SDCs to meet some of that need. Everyone here tonight lived or worked in Springfield and cared about the quality of public services and the physical health of Springfield. Right now, the building industry was facing an unprecedented downturn with very high unemployment. Building permits were a fraction of what they were a year ago and businesses were closing. There had been a lot of discussions in Lane County about how to City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 7 stimulate the economy and alleviate the strain on local businesses. Springfield had been a leader on this issue for months now, ftrst for deferring payments for permits and SDCs and twice voting to delay SDC increases. She asked Council to continue their commitment to serve local business and development by not only continuing to postpone the transportation SDC increase but also to postpone the wastewater SDC increase for new construction. They understood staWs concern over lost revenue from postponing the wastewater SDC, however, they met with staff recently and were told there was a possibility the lost revenue could be made up from existing homes that were annexing into Springfield. The HBA asked that the City continue to postpone the increases to transportation and wastewater SDCs for new construction only. This solution enables the City to potentially pick up a little more revenue without inflicting harsh fee increases on builders who were barely staying in business. 2. Daniel Hill, Arbor South Architecture and Construction, 863 Mint Meadow, Springfield, OR. Mr. Hill said he was a past president of the HBA. There was no doubt there were budget shortfalls in both the public and private sector. Builders and developers were well aware of the relevance of SDC and the purpose they served improving and maintaining the City's infrastructure. The question tonight was when was it appropriate to increase the fees, and now was not a good time. In the last year, housing starts dropped dramatically. His businesses had seen a 60% decrease in new residential projects, both on the design side and construction side. This had been a trying time for businesses. He had cut staff and reinvented their business to weather this difficult time. There were a number of factors that affected the industry right now. He described several of those factors. As housing went, so went the economy. There was no doubt that new housing was in a difficult place right now and until the current inventory was absorbed, new construction would be stymied. Any addition to the cost of new construction was significant and he asked Council to consider continuation of the deferral. 3. Lori Palermo, 1602 Linden Ave. Springfield, OR. Ms. Palermo said she was speaking on behalf of the Springfield Board of Realtors. She said they appreciated and supported staff's recommendation to postpone transportation SDCs and appreciated past postponements of SDCs as they continued to adjust and survive in these tough economic times. They would ask that no increase in wastewater SDCs be imposed at this time as well. She thanked the City for their efforts in doing all they could to continue to provide affordable housing opportunities in Springfield. 4. Brian McBeth, 33938 Martin Road, Creswell, OR. Mr. McBeth served as the Vice President of the HBA of Lane County, was a small business owner and builder. He worked throughout the Eugene/Springfield area and thanked the Mayor and Council for the support they had given this industry over the past year in deferring SDC increases. Springfield had received just over its fair share of building permits since they helped support this industry. He urged them to keep supporting the industry and defer the fees longer. 5. Mike Butler, Future B Homes, 826 McKenzie Crest Drive, Springfield, OR. Mr. Butler said he had been a builder in the Eugene/Springfield area for over 30 years. He noted the number of people that were unemployed. They needed the City's help to get more people back to work. They had a good meeting with City of Springfield staff and they understood the challenges the City faced. Ifpeople didn't get back to work, it would affect more and more people in the community. He asked Council to extend the deferral until June 30, 2010, to allow people to mobilize next Spring. There was a release about a new federal housing act to City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19,2009 Page 8 help some subsidies through the State of Oregon through financing. The Federal government knew they needed to get housing going. He asked Council to delay all increases until June 30, 2010. 6. Ed McMahon, HomeBuilders' Association, 2053 Laura Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. McMahon said he had talked to a lot of people that were close to this industry and it was obvious that the recent upsurge in the local real estate market was due to the first time homebuyers tax credit, which was due to expire November 30,2009. There was a possibility that tax credit could be extended. If the new homebuyers had to take another $2400 to the table, many would no longer qualify. He appreciated working with staff on this issue and would recommend the City continue the deferral of permits and SDCs until occupancy and perhaps have discussions about making that a permanent program for the City of Springfield. That was when the services were put into use and was a good way to say "Welcome to Springfield" for future development. To increase any fees with the housing market as it w~s would be detrimental. He asked Council to consider extending the deferral of SDCs. 7. Dale Kast, Kast Construction and DJS Investments, 2860 Martinique Avenue, Eugene, OR. Mr. Kast said he had a subdivision in Springfield with 17 lots. It had been a struggle to sell anything in that subdivision because of the economy. Any type of a fee increase would affect the sale of those houses as there was no way to pass those increases on to the buyers and there was nowhere left in the budget for him to take the extra $2400. If the increase was passed he would shut down building on those lots at this time. That would affect many workers in Springfield. 8. George Grier, 1342 'l2 66th Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Grier said he was a member of the Wastewater Citizens Advisory Committee (CAe). He respected Council's decision to defer SDCs during this time, but there was strong consensus from the CAC that future development should be mainly supported by development and not on the backs of existing ratepayers. The reason for the large increase in SDCs was that the cost of growth had to fall on someone's shoulders, either existing rate payers or on new construction. In the past, new construction had not paid its fair share. He understood the arguments regarding the economic imperative to continue construction, but if Council was considering whether or not to raise the gas tax, they would need to put that to a vote. They were essentially doing the same thing by asking existing rate payers to pay more without having them understand that was being done. It was an equity issue. He wanted to make sure the Council understood that the CAC was a broad group of people that considered these issues extensively, and their recommendation, which was close to consensus, was that existing ratepayers should not pay for growth. Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing. Councilor Ralston said there was confusion on what the people testifying were asking of Council. Mr. Goodwin said Mr. McMahon was talking about a separate issue, which was the deferral of payment until the time of occupancy rather than the time of the permit. The separate issue was whether or not the rates for SDCs should be increasing. Councilor Simmons said this was complicated. The CAC looked at a lot of financial issues on wastewater and storm water issues. It was clear the City needed to collect higher amounts of SDCs in order to have funds for projects that needed to be done for growth. He understood the City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19,2009 Page 9 complexity of the housing market today. He felt the City should increase the rate of SDCs to the level suggested by the CAC, but defer the transportation and wastewater component until March 1,2010. This would send a clear message to the buyers, bankers and builders that the City supported the development of the housing stock in Springfield, but we should also communicate to them that the rate would be raised in order to cover the cost of growth. Deferral until occupancy was not a major issue and was a small percentage of loss. This had to be looked at creatively. Mr. McMahon made a good point that the City needed to have some support for the builders and buyers. He believed the federal administration would continue the housing program, so he felt deferring the effective date of the increases until March 1, then increasing the rates to the full amount, would be appropriate. Councilor Lundberg said now was not a good time to raise fees for anything. She was supportive of deferring both transportation and wastewater fee increases. She was looking at building timeframes to determine the best time to increase. She supported the deferral of the fees at occupancy. Ifthe rates were raised in March, they would be due when the house was bought. She didn't agree that new housing didn't pay for itself. She didn't want to see the rate payers pay a lot, but a small increase in rates was fair. She liked the idea of collecting SDCs at annexation. She suggested deferring until March 1, 2010 to see how things looked at that time. Mr. Goodwin said if the Council chose a date to increase the SDCs, they could at any time between now and then in a subsequent session, change that resolution and suspend or reverse the rate. Councilor Lundberg said she would be interested in looking at March 1,2010, then looking at where we were. She understood this couldn't go on forever. The City did depend on SDCs so, in the least, the minimum increase would need to be considered at some point. Councilor Leezer asked Councilor Simmons if he recommended deferring until March, then raising the wastewater by 22 percent. Councilor Simmons said the twenty-two percent was the monthly ratepayer fee increases. He suggested Council raise the rate tonight to the full amount as recommended by the committee, but defer the effective date until March 1. Anytime between now and then, Council could alter that position. It was important to communicate the issue to all of the players. If the housing market went further down, Council could look at this again. The cost of capital improvements would continue to grow, and the City would end up with a greater debt than could be made up in a rate increase. It was a hard choice and he didn't want to raise the rate, but when staff had to do work for the health and safety of the City, they needed to have the funds. This was not going to be a popular decision. If Council raised the rate effective March 1, the twenty-two percent increase in fees would be nominal if no action was taken. Councilor Ralston asked for clarification on staff s recommendation. Mr. Goodwin said the CAC recommended that the rate be set at $191.04 and Councilor Simmons was suggesting raising it to that amount on March 1. Staff recommended raising it to $120.00 on January 1, then looking at it again on March 1. Councilor Lundberg said with staffs recommendation, a January increase would have been $2400, and the amount Councilor Simmons was recommending would be $3800. It was more City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 10 realistic to look at those numbers and how that would affect the cost to a builder or homebuyer. That was a large amount-per house. Councilor Pishioneri said this was complicated: the City couldn't make any money if there was no building; homebuilders were in a business and there were risks in business; but builders were important to our community. He supported charging those fees with annexation. He didn't think it was fair to put the cost on the backs of ratepayers. It was realistic to look at a deferral, as much as possible as far as we could. He supported a deferral to March. He asked if a builder would make the cutoff date if it took six months to build a house. Mr. Goodwin said the amount of the SDC would be established when the builder applied for the building permit. Councilor Pishioneri said that bought the builders until March 1 to apply. He asked what the current rates were per home. Mr. Goodwin said they were about $1020 for a single family residence. He explained the staff recommendation. He noted that there was some building activity in August and September. Councilor Pishioneri said he liked the middle ground approach. Councilor Ralston said deferring until June 30 was requested. If the charges were deferred to March 1, he was not sure that was long enough because most building didn't happen in the winter. He wondered if they could compromise and extend the deferral to April. Mr~ Goodwin said permit activity in a normal market accelerated around March. Councilor Ralston said he wanted to delay the transportation SDCs, and was leaning towards delaying the wastewater charges to some date, but maybe not March 1. Mayor Leiken asked Mr. Butler why he asked for the June 30 date. Mr. Butler said when they met with staff they tried to understand the issues for the City. There was a lot of funding needed for the Jasper Natron area, so that might be able to be deferred. Nothing would be happening before March I in the building industry. With actions both locally and federally, builders would mobilize again in the Spring. He said he was speaking only for himself. Councilor Lundberg said perhaps Council could look at some compromises during their Goal Setting Session. March seemed like it was too soon. She was more comfortable with the June date, which would be a better economic time frame for building. She agreed with Councilor Pishioneri that if nothing was going on, no funds could be collected. She was supportive of deferring until June 2010 with a check-in during March. Mayor Leiken said up to this point, the Council had not set a time certain date, but had brought the topic back for check-ins. A March date was a good time to have a check-in, but not make a decision. They had not heard from anyone that did appraisals or anyone from the banking industry. It was becoming more challenging for builders to receive credit as the regulations had tightened. That was something to consider when checking back in March. He understood what City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page II staff was trying to prepare for the Council because it was what they had asked but as elected officials, they were representing the citizens and had to base decisions on that. He would like to see Council pass a resolution asking the State and Federal delegations to back off on unfunded mandates because that was part of the problem. The City had to ask our citizens to pay more fees and charges to fund the projects we were required to do by the State and Federal government. The people that would be faced with the increases were people in the community who gave to our local charitable organizations and were the backbone of our community. He referred to Mr. Butler's remark about delaying some of the projects and asked if it might make sense. The Mayor and Council had done a good job in keeping their word regarding check-ins on this issue and he felt checking back in March made sense. Mr. Goodwin said the Council would be asked in April to consider local wastewater rate increases, so it may be good to look at this issue prior to making that decision. Councilor Lundberg said when they looked at this in March it would be good to look at the project list in terms of what was out there. The Jasper Natron sewer line was a big driving force. Some projects could end up costing the City less with the depressed economy. Councilor Ralston said he wanted to be fair to the ratepayers. There were projects that needed to get done, and the Council needed to be responsible financially. He wanted to create some certainty for the homebuilders and would suggest looking at an April date for the increase. Councilor Simmons said bonds for the Jasper Natron trunk: line had already been sold. This was complicated. No matter when they decided (March, April or June), they still wouldn't have the funds to do everything needed. The longer the delay, the more difficult it would be to take care of the projects required. His proposal was harsh and straightforward. There was a mood to defer, but they needed to be realistic. Mayor Leiken said he would have liked to hear from an appraiser. The value of the homes would not be the same to justify the increase in SDCs, and he didn't want to push the homebuilders out of our community. They would have to weigh the SDC cost, how much they were increasing, and the value of the home. Builders needed to make a profit. Councilor Lundberg suggested deferring the increase until June 30. That date would be when a final decision would be made. That would allow enough time to get into the building season and get a better sense of how things were going. She would still like to check in prior to that so the builders would have an idea of what the Council would do. She didn't think she could ever support the increase to $3800 per house. Councilor Leezer said she understood there were a lot of requirements regarding wastewater, and she wondered if this would jeopardize the City if we waited until June 30. Mr. Goodwin said this wouldn't jeopardize with the City's ability to comply with the December 31, 2009 Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) deadline, but could impact construction and planning of future projects. Councilor Leezer agreed with Councilor Pishioneri that building wouldn't occur in the winter. By the end of June they may have abetter idea ofthe economic climate for building. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 12 Councilor Ralston asked Councilor Lundberg which SDCs she would like to defer until June 30. Councilor Lundberg said both transportation and wastewater. Councilor Simmons asked what that meant in bottom line dollars. Mr. Goodwin said if the City maintained the current SDCs through the fiscal year, there could be a potential revenue loss of about $600,000. That presumed the rate of building activity that had been happening continued. Customarily, building activity fell off in the winter months, so that number was the upper end figure. Councilor Ralston said he leaned toward June 30, but would prefer to compromise to April. Mayor Leiken asked for clarification on Ordinance No.2. Mr. Goodwin said the ordinance was to amend the ordinance passed in January regarding liens recorded with Lane County and clarified that the City lien docket was all that was needed. He also noted that April15 occurred on a Thursday. Council could consider April 19, which was a Monday and a regular Council meeting date. June 30 fell on a Wednesday, so the nearest regular meeting date would be June 21. Councilor Pishioneri said it was justified to defer this to March for a check-in. It was their responsibility to the community to check in during March. They could possibly push it out further at that time if it was justified. They would defer the rates and look at it again on March 1. Mayor Leiken said he agreed. Council had kept their commitment with check-in dates. These were uncertain times and there was no way to give the builders certainty. He agreed to look again on March 1. It was worth the effort to look at this again. Council had kept their commitment. Councilor Simmons asked if the occupancy deferral would be continued. Yes. , Councilor Lundberg said in the spirit of compromise, she could support the March date. Springfield had always been a business friendly community and encouraged homeownership. She wanted to have a check-in to see how the economy was going as a whole, with the next check-in point in June. Councilor Pishioneri reiterated that he would hold to the same position in March if the economy was as it was today. As they built homes, those homes needed to be hooked up to City services and the City needed the funds to build that infrastructure. He wanted to be reasonable. Mayor Leiken spoke to Mr. McMahon's suggestion to make deferral to occupancy permanent, and suggested the Council look at that during their goals setting session. He asked how the resolutions needed to be stated to reflect Council's direction. Mr. Goodwin said all ofthe resolutions and ordinance was fine as written, except Resolution No. 7 (09-42). It should be revised to read as follows under the fIrst resolved, "NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the effective date of the increase in the local wastewater SDC, fixed as October 16 by Resolution No. 09-22, shall be amended and revised to March 1,2010". That meant that Council would have to make another decision on March 1. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 13 Councilor Ralston said he would prefer to move this out to April or June, but was willing to compromIse. L Mr. Goodwin clarified that passing these resolutions would require Council to make another decision on March 1. If they didn't, the increases would go into effect on that date. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR PISmONERI TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 09-40. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR PISmONERI TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 09-41. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR PISmONERI TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 09-42 CHANGING THE DATE TO FIX IT TO MARCH 1, 2010. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR PISmONERI TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.8. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 1 AGAINST (SIMMONS) (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR PISmONERI TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6247. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). Mayor Leiken thanked those that testified. He appreciated the great debate by Council and staffs hard work and flexibility. Councilor Lundberg confirmed that this was not different than what was done before to defer to October. That was correct. Mr. Grimaldi said this would come back to Council in February to allow time for Council to discuss during a work session before the March 1 hearing. 3. Supplemental Budget Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 09~44 - A RESOLUTION ADmSTING RESOURCES AND REQUIREMENTS IN THE FOLLOWING FUNDS: GENERAL, STREET, JAIL OPERATIONS, SPECIAL REVENUE, TRANSIENT ROOM TAX, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, BUILDING CODE, FIRE LOCAL OPTION LEVY, POLICE LOCAL OPTION LEVY, BANCROFT, BOND SINKING, REGIONAL BOND SINKING, SANITARY SEWER CAPITAL, REGIONAL WASTEWATER REVENUE BOND CAPITAL PROJECT, DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT CAPITAL, DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, STORM DRAINAGE CAPITAL PROJECTS, POLICE BUILDING BOND CAPITAL, REGIONAL WASTEWATER CAPITAL, STREET CAPITAL, SDC LOCAL STORM IMPROVEMENT, SDC LOCAL WASTEWATER REIMBURSEMENT, SDC City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 14 LOCAL WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENT, SDC REGIONAL WASTEWATER REIMBURSEMENT, SDC REGIONAL W ASTEW A TER IMPROVEMENT, SDC TRANSPORTATION REIMBURSEMENT, SDC TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT. LOCAL WASTEWATER OPERATIONS. REGIONAL WASTEWATER OPERATIONS. AMBULANCE, DRAINAGE OPERATING, BOOTH-KELLY, REGIONAL FIBER CONSORTIUM, INSURANCE, VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT, AND SDC ADMINlSTRA TION. Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. At various times during the fiscal year the Council was requested to make adjustments to the annual budget to reflect needed changes in planned activities, to recognize new revenues, or to make other required adjustments. These adjustments to resources and requirements changed the current budget and were processed through supplemental budget requests scheduled by the Finance Department on an annual basis. The supplemental budget being presented included adjusting resources and requirements in the General Fund, Street Fund, Jail Operations Fund, Special Revenue Fund, Transient Room Tax Fund, Community Development Fund, Building Code Fund, Fire Local Option Levy Fund, Police Local Option Levy Fund, Bancroft Fund, Bond Sinking Fund, Regional Wastewater Bond Sinking Fund, Sanitary Sewer Capital Fund, Regional Wastewater Revenue Bond Capital Project Fund, Development Assessment Capital Fund, Development Projects Fund, Drainage Capital Projects Fund, Police Building Bond Capital Fund, Regiooal Wastewater Capital Fund, Street Capital Fund, SDC Local Storm Improvement Fund, SDC Local Wastewater Reimbursement Fund, SDC Local Wastewater Improvement Fund, SDC Regional Wastewater Reimbursement Fund, SDC Regional Wastewater Improvement Fund, SDC Transportation Reimbursement Fund, SDC Transportation Improvement Fund, Local Wastewater Operations Fund, Regional Wastewater Operations Fund, Ambulance Fund, Drainage Operating Fund, Booth-Kelly Fund, Regional Fiber Consortium Fund, Insurance Fund, Vehicle & Equipment Fund, and SDC Administration Fund. The overall fmancial impact of the Supplemental Budget Resolution was to increase appropriations by $20,735,824. The City Council was asked to approve the attached Supplemental Budget Resolution. Mr. Olley explained some of the changes in the supplemental budget. 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 ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 09-44. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19,2009 Page 15 1. Stanley Lynch, 853 Centennial Boulevard, Springfield, OR. Mr. Lynch distributed a letter from his attorney to the Mayor and Council. He said he was before Council in reference to a warning citation he received for parking his tow truck at his residence, which had been standard issue for many years. He said he had been running his tow business for over 26 years. He moved his tow lot to Eugene about sixteen years ago on Hwy 99 and Royal. He received a letter from the City telling him he couldn't run his tow business from his residence, but he did not. Many cars and trucks went home on call, such as Police Cars, City, County, Springfield Utility Board, etc. They were no more important and were running small police stations, small utility companies and small cities from their homes. Firemen slept at the fire house so they could respond quickly. If someone was in a ditch, they didn't want to wait two hours to wait for a tow truck to come to their aid. The City would want to let law abiding citizens wait in the ditch in the winter. Police dogs were taken home in police cars residing in the officer's residence. A police car could bring unwanted people into the neighborhood. He wondered how someone could anonymously call the City and complain about his trucks. He had some complaints. As his letter stated, he was grandfathered in and didn't know why he had to pay funds for an attorney. Mayor Leiken asked for a staff response to Mr. Lynch. Mr. Leahy said he would like the opportunity to review the letter and work with staff to respond. Councilor Ralston said he understood Mr. Lynch's argument and he hoped they could work it out. Mayor Leiken said staff would take a look at this and report back to Council. He thanked Mr. Lynch for testifying. Mr. Leahy said he would work with staff in Code Enforcement. Mr. Lynch said he was here on behalf of other tow companies as well. 2. Corkey Gourley, State Farm Insurance, 1310 Market Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Gourley spoke regarding business in the Mohawk areas. Business owners decided to get together and meet monthly to make a difference in the community. They met on the second Wednesday of every month. It was a chance for.the business owners to unite and talk about the area. They had grown into their own organization, registered as dba Mohawk Business Neighbors. One of their goals was to watch out for other neighbors when business was bad, and to encourage and help businesses in the area. It had caused a good cohesive force. It had also developed a unique citizens' phone tree and email tree to alert each other when something happened in the area. He thanked Council for their consideration for the Open Banner program. This month, the business owners asked churches to become part of the Mohawk business area. From that came a food drive that was currently underway. Six of the nine churches they contacted agreed to help raise food for Mohawk families. On October 24, business owners in the Mohawk area along with the churches were bringing the food together. That food would stay in the Mohawk area and be distributed among the participating churches. He asked Council to watch to see what the Mohawk businesses were doing. COUNCIL RESPONSE CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 16 1. Correspondence from Alana Feldman, Springfield, Oregon Regarding Home Based Business with Attached Staff Response from Jim Donovan, Planning Supervisor. 2. Correspondence from Kathy January, Creswell, Oregon Regarding an Animal Friendly License Plate. Councilor Lundberg said she was supportive of the animal friendly license plates and would like to encourage that. Mr. Grimaldi said they could contact their legislature. Councilor Ralston said he had been contacted by Kathy January regarding the cat population issue and this could be a way to address that issue. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ACCEPT THE CORRESPONDENCE FOR FILING. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). BIDS ORDINANCES 1. Amend the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) to Include New Population Forecasts for the Cities of Springfield and Eugene and their Respective Urbanizab1e Areas East and West of Interstate Highway 5. ORDINANCE NO. 6248 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE SECTION OF THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN BY ADDING SEPARATE POPULA TON FORECASTS FOR THE CITIES OF SPRINGFIELD AND EUGENE FOR THE PERIOD 2010-2030 AND INCLUDING THE YEARS 2031. 2032, 2033, 2034 AND 2035 AND ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. Springfield and Eugene must have separate population forecasts to the year 2030 to comply with the provisions ofHB 3337 by the statutory deadline of December 31,2009. Portland State University (PSU) completed a coordinated population forecast for Lane County and all Lane County cities through the year 2035. The Board of Commissioners adopted the figures prepared by PSUinto the Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan (LCRCP) on June 17, 2009. The forecasts for Eugene and Springfield included urbanizable areas based on 1-5 as a boundary defIDing the jurisdictional responsibility of each city. Pursuant to the provisions ofORS 195.036 requiring the use of county coordinated population forecasts "for use in maintaining and updating comprehensive plans" Eugene, Springfield and Lane County were proposing to amend the text of the Metro Plan to include the same population forecasts for Eugene and Springfield that appeared in the recently amended LCRCP and including new numbers for the years 2031, 2032, 2033 and 2034. On September 22, 2009 the Joint Elected Officials of Springfield, Eugene and Lane County conducted a public hearing on the proposed Metro Plan text amendment providing for separate City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 17 population forecasts for Springfield and Eugene and the respective metro urban areas east and west ofI-5. No public testimony was presented during the hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing all three governing bodies extended the written record for seven days and set dates for additional readings of the ordinance in order to accommodate the recommendation of the three metro area planning commissions to include separate forecasts for the years 2031, 2032, 2033 and 2034. In addition, staff recommended changing the proposed text to include Lane County as a co-adopter of the ordinance, and to identify the area surrounding each city as "the respective metro urban area east or west ofI-5." No additional testimony was submitted during the extension of the written record. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6248. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL 1. Committee Appointments a. Planning Commission Appointment Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. Incumbent Sheri Moore completed her fIrst term (2 years) on the Planning Commission on July 31,2009 and was seeking re-appointment to the Planning Commission for a 4 year term. The City Council interviewed candidates for a vacancy on the Planning Commission on September 21, 2009 and agreed to reappoint Sheri Moore to a full four year term. Ms. Moore - resides at 1955 N. 16th Street, Springfield and is a retired teacher with Marcola School District. Ms. Moore was originally appointed to the Planning Commission on June 18, 2007 for a two year term. The Springfield Planning Commission is a seven member volunteer Commission appointed by the City Council. Of the seven members, two appointments may live outside the city limits and two appointments may be involved in the real estate profession. Positions were "at-large" and did not represent specific geographic areas. Currently the Planning Commission had one member, Commissioner Moe, who lived outside the City limits; none of the commissioners work in real estate. ' IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO RE-APPOINT SHERI MOORE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A TERM EXPIRING JULY 31,2013. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). b. Historic Commission Appointment. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 18 Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. The Springfield Historic Commission had one vacancy as a result of Ms. Tomblin's resignation. It was necessary to fill the vacancy at this time. The City received two applications for the vacancy from Judy Williams and Pat Mahoney. The Council interviewed Ms. Williams and Ms. Mahoney at the October 12, 2009 Work Session. At the Work Session, the Council selected Judy Williams to fill the vacancy, subject to Council ratification of her appointment on October 19,2009. Appointments to the Historic Commission must be confirmed during a Regular Session. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LUNDBERT TO APPOINT JUDY WILLIAMS TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF FORMER mSTORIC COMMISSIONER MAREN TOMBLIN'S TERM, WHICH EXPIRES MARCH 31,2010. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). 2. Business from Council a. Committee Reports 1. Councilor Lundberg said she read in the business section of the paper that Joe Hawes was not able to put a sports bar in.the Gateway area because of the Springfield Code. She would like to look at that to see what could be done. She felt a sports bar could work as a secondary use. She wanted to have ~ discussion on what could be done to address that. Mr. Grimaldi said it would be best to look at the zoning in Gateway to see ifthere were any adjustments that could be made to make it easier to have-secondary uses at that location and other locations. Mr. Leahy said one issue was related to transportation planning and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) concerns in the Gateway area and the demands placed by light industrial. Transportation planning would be involved in staff s discussions. Councilor Simmons said because the mix had changed in that area, it would be a good time to visit this for the whole area. 2. Councilor Ralston said the Human Services Commission (HSC) didn't have a budget committee member from Springfield and they were getting into heavy duty issues. Over the last year a group called the Program Policy and Insight Consultant had been doing surveys with providers and prioritizing services. This year the HSC received $2.4M in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. The group wanted to include those funds in the base line and there was a group working on a levy for Human Services. It would be to our advantage to have another representative from Springfield. City of Springfield. Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19,2009 Page 19 BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER 1. September 2009, Disbursements for Approval. Councilor Lundberg declared a conflict of interest as there was a payment to her employer, Marshal's, included in the disbursements. Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. The September 2009 Disbursements for Approval was attached for Council's review and approval. Checks totaling $11,198,905.77 were issued in September 2009. Documentation supporting these payments had been reviewed. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNILCOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR PISmONERI TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 2009, DISBURSEMENTS FOR APPROVAL. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 4 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSTENTION - LUNDBERG; 1 ABSENT - WYLIE). 2. Cedar Creek Partnership Memorandum of Understanding (MOD). Assistant Project Manager Todd Miller (public Works Environmental Services Division) presented the staff report on this item. Starting in 2002, the City of Springfield, City of Eugene, Lane County, Eugene Water & Electric Board, and US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) partnered on the Metro Waterways study to evaluate local waterway issues. This cooperative effort identified cost-effective methods for reducing flood damage, restoring habitat, and improving water quality. Two priority areas were identified for immediate study: Amazon Creek in the Eugene area and Cedar Creek in the Springfield area. The City of Springfield's interest in Cedar Creek included: · Management for flooding impacts · StOlID water and creek channel water quality improvement · Preservation of the local drinking water supply The study resulted in planning, public outreach, and development of a preferred alternative for moving forward. Local stakeholders met during the study to address the lower Cedar Creek watershed goals. These stakeholders identified that a memorandum of understanding (MOD) would formalize a partnership to address specific tasks. The value of the MOU included: · Identify the scope and limits of individual partner interests and roles in Cedar Creek · Document partnership support for diverting McKenzie River flow into Cedar Creek under the Oregon Department ofFish and Wildlife's (ODFW) Salmon-Trout Enhancement Program (STEP) · Document support for the McKenzie Watershed Council to provide STEP project management · Ensure partners have the support of their boards and councils for this effort. The Metro Waterways study was developed to engage the ACOE and regional partners to access federal funding for identified projects in Eugene and Springfield. The study resulted in preferred City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October. 19, 2009 Page 20 options. Currently, the ACOE was securing funding to proceed. The study identified specific tasks for local partner collaboration prior to construction efforts. The key task was securing an adequate river diversion to increase flows in Cedar Creek to meet the Metro Waterways goals. Partners in the Cedar Creek study developed the MOU to formalize the roles and relationships in maintaining this collaborative effort to support the McKenzie Watershed Council's administration of the ODFW STEP project to secure water flow. The MOU encoUraged continued participation and cooperation for Cedar Creek management, and it recognized the contributions of the partners' ongoing individual efforts toward meeting Cedar Creek goals. The MOU did not obligate partners to provide any fmancial resources or funding toward the goals ofthe MOU, nor did it limit or restrict partners' individual programs and responsibilities related to Cedar Creek waterways. The City of Springfield's commitment was limited to the current level of staff efforts toward the ongoing Metro Waterways project development. The City Attorney had reviewed and approved the MOD. Staff recommended that the City Manager be authorized to sign the MOU on behalf of the City. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AND SIGN THE MOU WITH STAKEHOLDER PARTNERS RELATED TO CEDAR CREEK WATER QUALITY, HABITAT AND FLOW CONTROL GOALS ON THE CITY'S BEHALF, THE MOU BEING SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM OF VERSION 7.1 (SEPTEMBER 2009), WITH SUCH CHANGES BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE DIRECTION OF COUNCIL. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT - WYLIE). 3. Collective Bargaining Agreement with SEIU Local 503 Oregon Public Employees Union Springfield City Employees, Local 995. Assistant City Manager and Interim Human Resources Director Jeff Towery presented the staff report on this item. Staff reached a tentative agreement with the SEIU/OPEU collective bargaining unit with respect to the terms of an agreement to succeed the agreement which expired as of June 30,2009. The tentative agreement with SEIU/OPEU reflected the parties' recognition of the current fiscal situation of the City. Overall, the tenor of the discussions were cordial and respectful although it was fair to acknowledge that there was some mutual frustration related to the time required to reach a tentative agreement on economic terms. Upon notification to the State in late August that the parties had reached impasse a mediator brought the parties together on September 29 and the parties were able to reach this tentative agreement that day. It provided for no wage increase for the one year agreement. The term provided flexibility for any Council decision with respect to the ongoing classification and compensation study. The contract did grant a one-time floating holiday for each employee. The only change with any significant economic impact was an adjustment in the level of city contribution to health insurance premiums. At present, the City contributed about 87 percent of the cost of the premiums of the lowest cost plan. This agreement would increase that to 90 percent effective January 1,2010. Staff had reviewed the practices for similar employees at both our traditional comparators, and other public employers in Lane County. That review discloses that the City was significantly out of line with other jurisdictions. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 19, 2009 Page 21 The net increase in cost is very modest. This approach allowed for some recognition of maintaining a sense of equity with other employers, and recognizing the impact that the current economy had on staff, while minimizing the impact on City finances. Mr. Towery thanked the bargaining team for both the City and the Union. For the City, Rhonda Rice (PW Senior Management Analyst), Matt Stouder (PW Civil Engineer, Bob Olley (Finance Director), Tom Mugleston (HR Management Analyst), and Bill Spiry (former HR Director). For the union, Molly Markarian (DSD Planner), Kyle Greene (PW Civil Engineer), Kim Copeland (IT Programmer), Van Seiner (PW Civil Engineer), Denny Wright (PW Construction Inspector), Andy Limbird (DSD Planner) and Leah Edelman representing SEIU. The City was notified last Thursday (October 15), that the union ratified the agreement with 95% approval. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR RALSTON WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR LUNDBERG TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH SEW LOCAL 503 OREGON PUBLIC EMPLOYEES UNION SPRINGFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 995. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT- WYLIE). Mayor Leiken asked Mr. Towery to give the Council's profound thanks to the union for being flexible and working with the City during these tough economic times. BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:09 p.m. Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa Attest: ~fflutL City Recor