HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/26/2010 Work Session
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, APRIL 26, 2010
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, April 26, 2010 at 5:30 p.m., with May~r 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 Matthew Cox, City Recorder Amy Sowa, and members of the staff
1. Pol~ce Planning Task Force Application Review.
Police Chief Jerry Smith presented the staff report item. The Police Planning Task Force (PPTF) had
two At-Large. positions opendu.e to tem:te.xpirations, of Dave JaCQbson.and,DoRM.o19I!~y...Oave
Jacobson was eligible for re-appointment for a second four'-yearterm.
The PPTF received five applications, including an application from current member Dave Jacobson
for re-appointment. The recommendation was to re-appoint Dave Jacobson. New applications were
received from Diana Alldredge, Jerry Brown, Ken Hutchison, anq Christine Stole. A subcommittee of
the PPTF interviewed the Jour applicants, alL of whom. were extremely qualified, onMarch 8th.. After
deliberation, the group recommended appointing Diana Alldredge as the At'-Large Representative.
Councilor Simmons said he was part of the subcommittee that interviewed the applicants and agreed
that the applicants were very qualified. It was a tough decision, but a consensus was formed to
recommend Ms. Alldredge. Councilor Simmons felt Ms. Alldredge would be an excellent advocate for
the community at large. It was unusual to have four very strong candidates apply for this position.
Council consensus was. to re-appoint Dave Jacobson and appoint Ms. Alldredge to the PPlF.
2. Historic Commission Interviews.
City Planner and Historic Commission Staff Liaison Molly Markarian presented the staff report on this
item. There was one vacancy on the seven-member Historic Commission. The. recruitment for this
vacancy opened on March 1, 2010 and closed on March 31,2010. One candidate applied: Kimarie
Lamb.
Municipal Code Section 2.502 stated that the qualifications formembership on the Historic
Cortunission included being appointees of Willamalane Park & Recreation District or Springfield
School District # 19; or specialists with expertise in the fields of architecture, history, architectural
history, planning, or archeology who lived within the Metropolitan Area General Plan boundaries;. or
residents, electors, or property owners within Springfield. Th~ School District and Willamalane
declined to appoint representatives to fill this vacancy.
State and Federal funding of the City's historic preservation activities stipulated that a majority of the
Commissioners had professional qualifications in a field related to historic preservation. Four existing
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 2
members possessed these qualifications. Ms. Lamb also met the qualifications and standards set forth
by the National Park Service regarding commissions.
The vacancy- on the Commission was the. result of Sean VanGordon's resignation due to work
obligations. Springfield City Council Operating Procedures Section IX, Subsection 3.7, stated that
vacancies on commissions shall be filled as needed throughout the year as vacancies occurred.
Springfield Municipal Code Section 2.504 stated that appointed members shall hold office for four
years with the terms staggered to provide overlapping and continuity. If appointed, Ms. Lamb would
serve a four'-year.term beginning on the date of appointment by City-Council, currently- scheduled for
May 3, 2010.
The Historic Commission recommended Ms. Lamb for the position.
The Mayor and Council chose the questions they would ask of Ms. Lamb.
. Have you attended a Historic Commission meeting? What were your impressions? (Councilor
Wylie)
. Why are you interested in serving on the Historic Commission? (Councilor Simmons)
. 'Describe your professional and personal experience as it relates to your desire to become a
Historic Commissioner. (Councilor Lundberg)
. What is it about Springfield's history that interests you most? (Councilor Ralston)
. Describe your familiarity with the City's historic resources. (Councilor Leezer)
. What initiatives are you interested in working on if you are appointed as a Commissioner?
Mayor Leiken welcomed Ms. Lamb and said he recalled that she had been through this process in the
past.
The Council interviewed Ms. Lamb.
The Mayor said he appreciated Ms. Lamb applying-for this position and that he was always pleased
with the high quality of applicants for this commission.
Consensus was to appoint Ms. Lamb to the Historic Commission.
3. Development Services Department (DSD) Staff Update on Development Review Cost Analysis
and Fee Study Project.
Planning Supervisor Jim Donovan presented the staff report on this item. At the December 7,2009
Work Session the City Council directed staff to pursue a cost analysis and fee study to determine
whether planning and development fees recovered costs in a manner that was fair to tax payers and the
development community. The data would be used to inform the budget process and. be incorporated in
the next annual development review fee update adopted by the City.'
I
Staff selected FCS Group as the City's fee consultant on March 25, ~010 after a Request for Proposals
(RFP) process and began work on the cost and fee analysis as of April 6, 2010. The project had two
basic components that must be separated and analyzed: Step 1 was an analysis of costs for providing
land use review services; Step 2 was a review of current fees and recovery methodologies (pages 19-
29 of the FCS Project Narrative in the agenda packet).
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
Apri126,2010
Page 3
The schedule for the project was. scoped very aggressively and. Mr. Donovan said he was here to
provide Council with a brief status report.and..anQutIine. for.up~comingCouncil involvementin.
advance of decision points:
Where Are We Today: Cost Analysis- Staff & FCS
. Data Input- Average Staff Time for Application Processing
. Stakeholder Group- Meeting on Costing Model and Feedback
. CostJRevenue Comparison and Finalizing Model Inputs
. Develop Recovery Methodologies for Council Review
(April 6- April 28, See User Fee (Uld Cost Analysis Diagram Steps 1-3, pg. 19)
Where Are We Going: Finalize Costs and Draft Recovery Strategies-All
. Second Stake Holder Group Meeting (Prior to May 10,2010).
. First Work Session with Council (tentatively set for May 10,2010).
. Review Cost Model, Draft Recovery Methodologies and Stakeholder Input
. Consultant Refines Based upon Council and Stakeholder Feedback
(~May 10- M.ay 25,2010)
Pending Council Input and Actions: City Council Involvement and Decisions:
. Public Hearing on Cost Model and Recovery Strategies (~June 7, 2010)
. Council Deliberates and Decides on Strategy for Cost Recovery
. Direct staff to make final revisions to fee schedule and set timeline for adoption of the updated
Development Review Fee Schedule. '
Mr. Donovan noted that the original proposal from FCS was somewhat high, but they were willing to
bring their cost down to something the City could afford.
Mr. Donovan discussed the recovery methodology: He felt comfortable with the initial numbers for the
cost recovery. With those new numbers, they would look at actual costs, incentives, and other
programs, and determine the actual cost. Review of those factors would help distinguish between
small businesses and very large businesses. He referred to page 19 of the proposal which showed a
flow diagram, and noted that they were at Step 3 in that process.
Mr. Donovan said they were close to the timeline that was in the proposal. He had planned to- come
back to Council with the consultant on May 10 and a public meeting for public -input on May 24. A
final meeting for adoption of the fee schedule would be scheduled at a later date.
Mr. Donovan said they had met with the stakeholders group to review the model and the process. Staff
would be meeting with an expanded group and talk to them about cost recovery methodologies and
some preliminary ideas. They would bring feedback from that meeting to the Council during their next
work session.
Development Services Director Bill Grile said Council may want to know what level of detail they
would get. What staffhad done regarding fees in the past was to take the program cost.and allocate the
fees against that cost. Council would be going through the different application types, seeing what the
cost was to process those applications based on input from staff and the consultant, then seeing which
fees the City was exceeding costs on and which they were not. That would be where the policy choices
would be most fruitful. One of the issues that caused this discussion to come to Council iuthe first
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 4
place was factoring the' amount of impervious surface in site plans. The information would. show. what
it would actually cost independent of that factor. Some fees may need an increase, and some a
decrease. The overall amount collected may not change much.
Councilor Pishioneri said Bend had this study done last year. He asked if Bend had asked the same
questions and if Council could get a copy of that report to look over.
Mr. Donovan said he could provide that information. It was all about the implementation so it would
be good to look at how they implemented their fees. Their study was for building fees, and
development re,view fees. Some of that information would be relevant.
Councilor Pishioneri said in reading the report, questions. CQuld be found that should be asked earlier
in the process. He asked about looking at the value ora site before and after development to determine
if fees could be reduced because of the increased amount of tax receipts that would come to the City
after the development was complete.
Mr. Donovan said that took it one step further. He explained. They could look at providing incentives
at the front end and at occupancy, and load the fees in the middle value. He discussed profit made by
some development and how much of that was in a fee.
Councilor Pishioneri said he would not like to l,ook at that aspect.
Councilor Simmons said in reading the proposal and looking at the agencies involved, one of the
things that came out was not so much the. comparative costs hetweeD- cities~ but the effort versus
recovery of actual costs. When they started this process, it was clear the City wanted to capture what it
cost the City in the fees and not be outside of that cost: When reading the proposal, he wondered
where we went from here in the process. It wasn~t the relative value of the development, but looking at
some of the values and costs to provide service to that development that was needed. As we went
through this, there would be additional questions. He noted the number of people in the site plan
meeting and questioned why that many people were needed. If developers were building something
that had been built in many other communities, there was no need for so many staff reviewing the
plans. He would like to hear where technology was taking us. and what could be done to improve the
process for the citizens and the builders.
Mr. Grimaldi said they were not able to get into process issues with this study, but noted that the
Development Services- Department (DSD) and Public. Works (PW) directors would be. looking at
processes.
Councilor Simmons said when we got back into the building cycle, we needed to be efficient. He
referred to the zero days to process certain applications.
Mr. Grimaldi said the zero days issue was an outcome of process improvement.
Councilor Simmons said they needed to keep moving forward:
Councilor Lundberg said the City provided services on behalf of the citizenry, and it was our job to
provide that service in the best way possible. If it looked like the City was making money, that was not
good. Efficiencies were one way to make it cost less to do something and she hoped that came out of
this process. She wanted to be comfortable to stand before citizens saying we were doing the best we
could in the most efficient way possible. She asked where the policy decisions were within that. She
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 5
wanted to see the steps to be taken for small business, and the steps to be taken for large business,
perhaps in a graph. She did want to separate out businesses making a lot of money. The City was
doingwhatwasxequired,.. and.what thebusinessmadeiu.tenns9f profitwas,uot the City'sbusiuess.
She wanted to separate whatthe City had. to do with where we were going to be. She asked' who was'
on the stakeholders group. Council often chose those members.
Mr. Donovan said he could talk with Council about the expanded group. The fust group was to get
buy-in from arange in the development community. That group included Randy IDedik (resource
provider), MonicaAnderson.(engineer)~ShawnHyland~Orin.Posner.Jrom.Lane. Forest J~roducts...
(community member at large)~ John Hammer, and Mike Evans (planner).
Mr. Grile said this was directly related to the issue offees. Staffhad held internal discussions about
coming back to Council on how to get to those substantive issues. Efficiencies were one way to
control costs~ and reviewing the City's standards and requirements was another way. For that
discussio~ staff would like to worksoIDe. of that out first,. thengetguidance of who Council would
like staff to sit down.with.for.the.expanded group..Aboutsixyears.ago:o former City Councilor$tu.
Burge set up a Developers Task Force~ which addressed some of those issues. Staffwould like to
revisit that concept.
Councilor Lundberg said that was what she wanted. Council policies set the tone, so they needed to
remain involved. '
Mr. Donovan said he had tried to separate the two issues of cost-recovery and process:
Councilor Pishioneri clarified the process. Looking at the different codes and requirements would be a
big job.
Mr. Grimaldi said staff would design a process. and. bringjt to Council for approval.
Councilor Pishioneri spoke on the sewer hook-up issue. They needed to start questioning what the City
was doing and determine what was needed.
Mayor Leiken complimented staff on the group they put together. It included experienced and
sophisticated developers. that had concerns. He appreciated. that. and. feltthey . would. be. frank
Mr. Donovan said they had a very productive meeting.
Councilor Ralston said he felt the City charged too much~ but he wanted to know if something was
defensible. Up front, Springfield may be charging more than other cities, but those citi~s may not be
recovering their costs or may be charging in the end. He wanted to make sure we were just recovering
our costs and not charging more. He noted that not every department made revenue~ but still
performed a service.
Mr. Grile said those costs were factored in the model.
Councilor Ralston said perhaps other communities needed to look at their comprehensive fees as well.
Mr. Donovan said overheads. and indirects. were, factored. in the model" but they also neede<ito
consider the front-end costs, back-end costs, and the total costs. When setting fees to recover costs, the
true cost of the service provided may exceed the cost for providing those services in different years. It
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 6
would be a policy decision to cover the average annual costs for providing those services from all
departments. Developers all benefited from other services, although they should be able to expect a
certain level of those services through the taxes they pay.
Councilor Ralston referred to a small business that was charged large fees for work they. wanted to do.
to their business. He felt it needed to be reviewed.
Mayor Leiken said it was also important to let developers know information, such as time to travel
zones. He would like to see what additional fees were to accommodate those requirements. He wasn't
sure how many other communities had a drinking water protection plan like Springfield. Those on the
committee knew those things, but they may talk to people that didn't know so would need to provide
that information. Impervious surface issues also added costs. It was important to protect our drinking
water for the citizens' of Springfield~
Mr. Donovan said after talking with developers, they always understood. We had State and Federal
regulations regarding impervious surfaces.
Mayor Leiken said he appreciated the aggressive timeline.
4. Periodic Update on Fire Merger~
Fire Chief Dennis Murphy presented the staff report on this item. He said Randy Groves, Eugene Fire
Chief, would join him as he got further into the discussion.
Springfield Fire & Life Safety (SFLS) was proceeding with plans for Functional Consolidation with
Eugene. Fke & EMS under direction _ofjointcity managers as. explained to JointElected.Officials.at
the December 7,2009 meeting. The Council received the last update on March 8. This Work Session
item constituted a second update and process check with Council.
Based on a 2009 consulting firm report and internal analysis, the city managers and fire chiefs of
Springfield and Eugene recommended initiation of preliminary steps fora functional consolidation of
the. Eugene and Springfield fire departments as a means of reducing costs while maintaining service
levels and providing for metro-wide service. efficiencies. Both. councils directed. their city managers. to
proceed with efforts on an incremental basis.
The next step was the proposed adoption of an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between the two
cities to share the services of certain key administrative positions in both departments, beginning July
1, 2010. The IGA was in final preparation stages- and was-expectedto. be presented to. Council in May.
The primary benefit of a functional consolidation was that it permitted both cities to share savings
resulting from eliminating redundant resources, taking advantage of existing vacancies of key
personnel. Meanwhile, service levels were expected to be maintained or improved as a result of joint
efficiencies. Projected personnel savings for the City of Springfield for FY 2011 beginning in July I,
2010.were over $280;000 with a similar amount of savings to the City of Eugene.
A secondary benefit was an incremental approach to merger. This permitted the appointed and elected
officials of both cities to evaluate the feasibility of continued. efforts based on progress reports, prior to
the decision to proceed with a full merger.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 7
Chief Murphy said the departments did a functional consolidation of field operations and~Tesponse in
July 2007, called the Three Battalion system. That system had produced a lot of good response, and
had low cost involved. In March 2009, a consultant looked at expanding that type of thinking to all
operations, and felt it was very conceivable. A number of joint elected officials' meetings were held in
which this topic was- discussed. In December 2009;' the elected~ officials. directed the~ City- Managers' of
Springfield and Eugene to work together to implement an incremental merger process.
Chief Murphy said the original visioning map called for implementing the proposed process sometime
in March - May. They delayed that slightly in order to get the IGA done first. Attached was a draft
IGA for Council to review. Although Attachment A was not included, they would be finalizing that
when they brought it back to Council That attachment would list the p.ositionKthatwouldbe
combined. Currently, both departments were operating under the office of joint chiefs, putting out
memos togetherto both organizations. Implementation of this lOA would be ready by July 1, 2010.
Chief Murphy discussed the contents of the IGA, such as formalization of the Three Battalion System,
and the increase of efficiency be minimizing the duplication of employees and facilitations at the
administrative level incrementally. These were administrative positions and not union positions. Three
unions were involved: IAFF, AFSCME and OPED. They were not proposing any vacancies or
merging of those positions at this time. At the administrative level, all employees remained the
employee oftherr current jurisdiction. The IGA also maintained the previous IGA forsharing reserve
apparatus. This allowed each jurisdiction to borrow equipment from each other. The IGA also
maximized the use of facilities. He noted the training facility that was in Eugene, and how Springfield
share costs without building a new facility. Both cities accepted the liability of their own employees.
There was no transfer of funds, and~ the budgets wouldurema.iaseparate . for eamcity. Future
administrative vacancies were addressed in the IGA. The current consolidations included the Fire
Chief, Fire Marshal, Deputy Chief of Operations, Deputy Chief of Emergency Medical. Services,
Administrative Services Bureau Manager, Deputy Chief Special Operations, and Battalion Chief of
Training fora,n immediate savings of $280,000 SavIDg~ immediately. It w~ p~ ofhi~ pl;;m to
facilitate this IGA, which would be effective upon signing of the agreement. It would continue until
cancelled with one fun fiscal year notice to either agency to-terminate. Thatwould allow each~
jurisdiction's budget to be adjusted accordingly.
Chief Murphy said Springfield had three new fire trucks coming before June 30,2010. These fire
trucks would.not be ptPnted orange as it devalued the fire trucks for resale. Springfield was buying the
same type of equipment with the same type of specifications as Eugene. He invited Chief Groves to
come forward. Chief Groves had- spent the last two months with Springfield's Executive Team, and~
had invested a lot of time at no charge to Springfield.
Mayor Leiken thanked Chief Murphy and said he had appreciated Chief Murphy's leadership.
Councilor Pishioneri asked how the time would be split up by these joint positions' since the Eugene
Fire and Life Safety Department was significantly larger than Springfield's. He was concerned that the
three top staffwould be spending more time on Eugene related issues than Springfield's. He asked
how personnel issues would be addressed regarding chain of command: He asked- about the cost
savings being split evenly. He asked if our costs savings would be used up when the merger was
complete to bring Springfield staff up to the salaries of Eugene.
Mr. Grimaldi said answers to tho~e questions would depend on where they were in the process.
Councilor Pishionerisaid.he wanted to anticipate. the costs down the road.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 8
Chief Murphy said they had been fortunate that the City Managers, Assistant City Managers, Chiefs,
and unions all had been involved. He deferred to Mr. Grimaldi to answer the question about the
potential pay-increase.
Mr. Grimaldi said ultimately if the merger went forward, there would be pay increases. They
UJ;lQerstood that W(lS coming. Our,ipg the interin1, they wQuld lQQlc at tl;l~ mGl"eases> eliminate them, and
still produce the savings. Two of the criteria for him to move forward were to continue to save money
and provide service. Initially during the IGA> there would be no increases in pay.
Chief Murphy said they didn>t wantto achieve savings' and.then give itup-: It was. a challenge. During
the functional consolidation, it contemplated that if this was not working, they would look at what it
took to restore to individual entities. They would answer the question about combining the unions and
compensation before moving to a full consolidation.
Councilor Pishioneri said when combining departments, it would become a very large department,
effecting comparables.
Mr. Grimaldi said that was correct.
Chief Murphy said the new plan was to help create savings and they needed to figure out a way to
continue those savings. That would mean doing business differently.
Eugene Fire Chief Randy Groves addressed- some of Councilor Pishioneri.>s questions. He said- it was
not a foregone conc1usionthat more staff time would be spent onthe Eugene side. It was a matter of
scale. On the Eugene side they had more stations and firefighters for a larger geographic area. There
were also more supervisors on the street. He explained. The main thing was to have a common
oversight to provide better service by having more standardization throughout the system. There
would also be some economies of scale in administration and support functions. The one place where
there was a difference was in the Fire Marshal's. office. Eugene' sFire. Marshal's- office. was-the same-
size as Springfield's, meaning they had fewer prevention and plans review staff per capita than
Springfield. They would continue to work out that piece. On the response end, Springfield and Eugene
both responded and provided assets in a combined effort. They were looking for the opportunity to get
to the next level, finding efficiencies. There could be some unintended costs that had not been
projected, but there would also be some hidden savings they would find. They would be watching that
closely as they went throughthe process.
Chief Murphy addressed the question regarding discipline and personnel issues. He said the IGA
contemplated that discipline would be taken care of within each City. He explained how that would
work. The disciplinary action would go through the chain of command for the respective city and
finally to Chief Groves with a recommendation from the respective City Manager.
Mr. Grimaldi said it would not be'much.di:tIerent-than contracting foran interim. position ordirector~
Chief Murphy said South Lane used a contract Fire Chief for a time, which was similar. With this
IGA, they took the savings initially based on the vacancies that occurred in Eugene and Springfield.
Those vacancies lined up on each side very well. There were some additional opportunities for
vacancies, and there would be dialogue between Chief Groves and the two City Managers about those .
vacancies as they arose.
City of Springfield
Council Work Ses~jQILM!n1!l~~,
April 26, 2010
Page 9
Councilor Leezer asked if this would meet the shortfalls currently experienced by both Fire
Departments.
Mr. Grimaldi said when putting the budgettogether-in Springfield; they asked. departments. to come up.
with budget reductions. In order to meet the reduction without reducing services, the City was
counting on reductions fQr this merge.r m the next tiscal year. m the shQrt term, it was meeting our
needs. When projecting forward, the City was not projecting the merger in existence, but projecting
putting the vacant positions. back in the budget.
Chief Murphy discussed the way those vacant positions would have been handled without the merger.
He preferred this as meeting our needs compared to what it would have been without the merging of
positions.
Mr. Grimaldi said there was still a problem with the ambulance service. That would take other
solutions besides the merger~
Chief Murphy said the FireMed campaign was part of that solution.
Chief Groves said the savings derived from this first year would plug the Eugene F &LS shortage in
the City budget Eugene. also had deficit in the Ambulance Transport fund..
Councilor Ralston said he recalled-a figure of saving $850,000~
Chief Murphy said that would be with the full implementation. He discussed the steps of
implementation with the first $580,000. They were on the right path and actually ahead of schedule.
Full implementation could take about three years on the administrative side. They would be relying on
personnel for additional savings. Sustainable. savings in personnel. was' what they were looking for, as,
they were the most reliable.
Chief Groves said they wanted to be conservative in what they promised.
Councilor Ralston said this didn't address new fire stations. He asked if this was still up to each
jurisdiction as they expanded.
Chief Groves said he was asked that question in Eugene as. well. Whetherajurisdiction grew'up or
out, ittook more firefighters. If it expanded out, more fire engines were needed and perhaps another
station. If it expanded up, they needed expensive ladder trucks and staffing. Engaging a high rise fire
or other problem required a lot of resources.
Chief Murphy said Springfield F &LS had strategized so we would not need a new fire station for
Jasper Natron.. One. station could. be relocated rather than building anew station to offset growth for
the next ten or more years~
Councilor Wylie said she and Councilor Ralston had served on the Ambulance Task Force with
Eugene City Councilors, County Commissioner Handy, Ghief Murphy and Chief Groves, and some of
the rural Fire Chiefs and staff. They met for two hour meetings once or twice a month for nearly a
year. They learned a lot and heard a lot of testimony. In the process,. they looked at ways. to fund fire.
services whichincIudedjncreasjngFireMed,Jo.okingjntomQbilehe.altb. care service, health care
reform, and a merger. The merger was the first step and everyone had done an exceUentjob trying to
cover all issues of both cities to get the maximum service to the community. As we grew and
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 10
resources dwindled, we needed to find ways of economizing with real care. That had been done in this
process. The two Chiefs, staff and City Managers had worked hard to put together a thoughtful,
careful pr.ocess.. As_ they mQved into tbj~tPrQce.s.s,.sb~trnsted, Chi~fGI:QVe.S.InJ:h~ fbwr~, they would.
look at other issues; such as a fire district That'was' another issue down the road.
Chief Murphy said in 1981, ambulance service first came to Springfield. The revenue generated by
Springfield Fire and Life Safety from then through FY09 was $102M. The F &LS Department was
now going through difficult times, but was still planning on generating $5M with their ambulance
enterprise~ They had confidence to continue. this in a forward; motion. They would continue to raise. as
much revenue as possible.
Councilor Simmons said the IGA was weU crafted. The short term savings were real and valuable, but
the long term savings would evaporate quickly. The maintenance cost question had not been answered
on a comparative basis of what Springfield paid compared to Eugene. They didn't know what the
maintenance proportionthrougaEugene Public Works would be whengo~ beyond this. step. There
were pieces. missingjnthispuzzle, hut itwas.a.gopJlfQJutdatiQll.1hey neededtQhavetMt .cost
analysis before moving to the fmal steps. The two departments had worked very well together. When
getting into the bargaming unit values and maintenance values, that would be more difficult. Service
was the important thing. Staff had done a great job in CQJ!structmg this ag~eenWl1t, but he felt the total
cost factor was not included.
Chief Murpny spoke regarding maintenance and. said there could be no merger untilthatissue was
address.ed. Springfield contracted outtheir maitltenance and.:Eugenedi<;l .it m...llQuse..They needed to
find which of the systems served best. If there were going to be savings in fire service, there would
need to be savings in the support services.
Chief Groves said they had done -some preliminary research on the maintenance issues and there were
pros and cons of both services. Fleet costs in Eugene were. higher than- in Springfield. At the same
time, there.were pros and cons in leasing versus buying. He explained. Theyhad held conversations
with labor and would continue to have conversations with them about what it would look like if the
two departments merged. They needed to know that before moving forward. The IAFF union
recognized that there would be some level of cost control in order for this to work.
Chief Murphy said in talkingwith SEIU/OPEU, he was impressed how they were following the issues.
Their attitude was cooperative.
Councilor Simmons asked about the different types of fire hydrants in Eugene and Springfield.
Springfield Fire Marshal AI Gerard said Springfield had three different kinds.
Councilor Simmons said he wanted to make sure they all had the same connections.. Yes.
Chief Groves said the radio systems were on common frequencies. Battalion Chief Dana Burwell
(Springfield) co-chaired a Lane Fire Defense Board Radio subcommittee with Chief Groves to deal
with the FCC frequency requirements. They were tryW.g to IIlQve together as they addressed those
issues. Whether they merged or not, he would be a strong advocate to come up with common
specifications on equipment and parts which would help~hsavingsthrough economy of scale~ They
would also work towards standardization of communication.
Councilor Lundberg asked what. Chief Groves would wear when he headed up both departments.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 11
Chief Groves said for now, he would wear his current uniform. He often wore suits rather than his
uniform. When they were fully merged, they would most likely have one patch and one badge.
Councilor Lundberg thanked everyone for working so hard on this. She liked the IGA, and felt there
were very valid issues that had come up regarding comparables. She asked if there was a reason they
couldn't run the IGA for more than one year.
Chief Murphy said the sustainability long-term of an isolated workforce was not possible. The true
savings were beyond this IGA, and would evade the cities until the merger. The labor people had ideas
of how to incur savings when they were fully merged. They needed labor and management working
together. He noted how relocating fire stations saved the City from building another.
Chief Groves said. Eugene did something similar about 10 years ago. This-process'was about-
reinventing fire service in the metropolitan area. He and Chief Murphy had great confidence in the
firefighters and staff in coming up with ideas. They could improve what they were already doing.
Councilor Lundberg asked if the merger meant a fire district in some way and would be its own entity.
Chief Groves- said thatwasthe consultant's recommendation and. was. a possible outcome; but was not
required.
Mr. Grimaldi said the labor unions had a strong interest in moving to a fire district.
Councilor Lundberg said if a district was. created, all the money that currently went into tl1ecities. and
the property and buildings would all be transferred to the district. It was a whole new taxing district.
She discussed the taxing implications, and that it would allow the City to tax -fllore. There was the
option of waiting to add more tax back in, which some cities had done. A district could stabilize
everything, but it could mean a lot more in taxes for the citizens.
Mayor Leiken said they couldn't do an.ything regarding a fire district without agreement from all
entities in the Metro Plan. He didn't see an option after IUll.e. 30,.2011. He asked.what wowd.happen.at,
that time.
Mr. Grimaldi said in December the cities would need to decide whether or not to continue with the
IGA, ,extend it, or drop it. He said it would be six. months to the decision point. If they were not going
forward with the discussion or merger, the cities would need to recruit for a Fire Chief and plan
budgets for the following year.
Mayor Leiken said it would basically be a 6 month trial. Conceptually he was supportive. This was a
business contract. There had been a friendly competition between Eugene and Springfield for a
uQmber of years. For 6 months, Chief Groves would have public relations putting Springfield citizens
at ease that Eugene was not taking over a Springfield department. That would be his number one job,
and Chief Groves was articulate and the Mayor felt he could do it. He just wanted to clarify the actual
timeline.
Mr. Grimaldi said this was part trial run and part working out the details of the questions that had
come. up regarding costs.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
April 26, 2010
Page 12
Mayor Leiken said of any department in- Springfield that could make this work, F&LS could'do it. He
would enjoy seeing how this would work. The Third Battalion was working very well and he
appreciated their work. When moving forward on the cost issue, they would need to look at the details
of what the consultant had on the fire district. He felt that Districts may not be the best way to handle
this, especially in a S~te with. limitations on property taxes. He spoke regarding the Oakland/Alameda
model.and felt that needed to be explored. The unions may think a district was the way to go, but it
may not be the best in Oregon. They needed to protect the taxpayers, and make sure the fire
department had the tools to work efficiently.
Councilor Wylie said that an IGA merger did not make a district. That would be another issue at
another time. Before that discussion, they would need to look at how much the ambulance fund was
draining our general funds jointly. Chief Murphy had such a passion around FireMed and saving funds
to make this work. She asked Chief Groves how he would continue to do that.
Chief Groves said he didn't have Chief Murphy's history and experience with FireMed, but he felt he
had .a talented staff that did. Any good leader relied on the experti$e of their staff, Without people
already in place, this would be very difficult. He felt he brought other skill sets, such as a background
in operations. He had been with the Eugene Fire & Life Safety for 30 years, and in fire service for 31
years, and had substantial command experience, including a high rise fire.
Mr. Grimaldi said in reality Chief Murphy's passion and energy couldn't be replaced.
Mayor Leiken said at six months he would like to see long term options besides a district. They
needed to think long-term and. make sure. it hada.lastingpositive affect of our communities..
Councilor Ralston asked what would happen when Chief Groves retired. He asked which City would
choose the successor.
Mr. Grimaldi said the two city managers would make the decision.
Chief Groves said thatwas in the IGA.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned 7:23 p.m.
Minutes Recorder - Amy Sowa
Attest:
It-