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