HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/27/2010 Work SessionCity of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2010
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday,. September 27, 2010 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Leiken
presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Lundberg, Wylie, Ralston, Simmons, and Pishioneri. Also
present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Joe
Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa, and members of the staff.
1. Arts Commission Application Review.
Librarian Came Schindele-Cupples presented the staff report on this item: The Arts Canission had
two vacancies on its board. Staff advertised for two position openings due to the two resignations of
members Carol Plaia and Kathleen Smith. The Arts Commission had received three applications. All
applicants, Michelle Lian, Niles Schartz and Jan Felton attended the .September 13, 2010 Arts
Commission meeting and were interviewed.
The Arts Commission recommended that Michelle Lian and Niles Schartz be appointed to the
commission. Niles would complete a term that would expire December 31, 2010. Michelle would
complete a term that would expire December 31, 2013.
Michelle Lian and her husband had two children. She was interested in supporting the arts for
children and finding ways to keep arts education in our schools.
Niles Schartz was along-time resident of Springfield and aself-employed interior design and
remodeling contractor. He was interested in work with the City Hall gallery and bringing art
experiences to Springfield-at-large.
The Arts Commission believed all applicants were eligible and qualified to serve on the commission.
The Council was requested to review the Arts Commissions' recommendations at the Work Session
and to appoint two candidates at the Regular Session on October. 4, 2010. .
Council agreed with staff's recommendation.
2. Planning Commission Interview.
-Development Services, Director Bill Grile presented the staff report on this item. Incumbent Eric Smith
completed his first three- year term on July 31, 2010 and was not seeking re-appointment to the
Planning Commission. Incumbent Lee Beyer would complete his second 4 year term on October 2,
2010 and was not eligible for another term.
The City received two (2) applications for two vacancies during a six week recruitment process. The
first was from Ms. Denise M. Bean. Ms. Bean resided at 1220 S. 69~' Place, Springfield and was a tax
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 27, 2010
Page 2
professional located in Springfield, Oregon. The second application was from Mr. Gregory A. James.
Mr. James resided at 6814 "F" Street, Springfield and was employed at Springfield School District 19
as, a purchasing supervisor.
The Springfield Planning Commission was a seven member volunteer commission appointed by the .
City Council. Its members served four-year terms. Of the seven members, two appointments may live
outside the City limits and two appointments may be involved in the Real Estate profession. Positions
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, and none that worked in Real Estate.
The Council decision on appointments was scheduled for the Regular Meeting on October 4, 2010.
The Mayor and Council chose the questions they would ask of each of the applicants.
Mayor Leiken welcomed Mr. James. There was no need for formal introductions as Mr. James knew
the Mayor and Council members because of his. service on the Willamalane Board of Directors.
Mayor Leiken welcomed Ms. Denise Bean. The Mayor and Council introduced themselves to Ms.
Bean.
The Mayor and Council interviewed Mr. James.
The Mayor and Council interviewed Ms. Bean.
1. Why are you interested in serving on the Planning Commission? (Mayor Leiken)
2. What role do you think the Planning Commission should have with the revitalization of
downtown? (Councilor Wylie) t
3. The Planning Commission generally meets two evenings each month and additional
evening meetings are sometimes. necessary. Given your work and/or family demands,
how confident are you that you can fully participate as a Commission member?
(Councilor Simmons)
4. Many of the land use laws applied by the Planning Commission are state or federal
mandates. During a Planning Commission. hearing, how would you reconcile your own
personal opinions with the applicant's interests when those interests do not comply with
the land use laws? (Councilor Lundberg)
5. What is your general understanding of the relationship between the Planning Commission
and City staff, and the Planning Commission and the City Council? (Councilor Ralston)
6. How familiar are you with planning laws and policies and the purpose they serve in
Springfield's land use decision making process? If your experience with these laws is
limited, what actions would you take to become familiar so that you can function fully as
a Planning Commissioner? (Councilor Pishioneri)
City of Springfield .
Council Work Session Minutes
September 27, 2010
Page 3
Mr. James said he appreciated the Mayor and Council taking the time to interview him. He was
excited about the opportunity to serve at this level. He appreciated the Mayor and.Council for the time
they committed to the City and for their leadership.
Ms. Bean said she had heard that the Planning Commission members rotated attendance at the City
Council meetings and asked if that was correct.
Councilor Ralston said when he served on the Planning Commission they did encourage the members
to rotate attendance, although it was not required. Planning Commission member Shari Moore was in
attendance this evening.
,Ms. Bean asked how the communication flowed from the Planning Commission to the City Council.
Mayor Leiken said the City Council received copies of the Planning Commission agendas and
minutes. Most of their information was received through the planning staff.
Councilor Ralston said they also held joint meetings from time to time.
Councilor Wylie said land use was a very complex issue. As a City Councilor, she expected the
Planning Commission to do a lot of the research on those issues before bringing recommendations to
the City Council. She depended on that research.
Mayor Leiken said he thought this was a very exciting time in Springfield. ~ '
Mayor Leiken told each candidate that the Council would be deliberating tonight and would notify the
candidates of their choice.
r
Councilor Ralston noted the quality of applicants for these positions. -Both of these people would make
.excellent representatives on the Planning Commission.
Councilor Wylie agreed.
Councilor Pishioneri said both applicants were well qualified. Mr. James had been very involved in
the community, and Ms. Bean had great enthusiasm.
Mayor Leiken said he was sorry to see Eric Smith leaving the Planning Commission, but understood it
was to take additional time to focus on growing his business. He liked the fact that Ms. Bean was a
business owner.
Councilor Simmons asked how the planning staff brought new Planning Commissioners up to speed
when appointed. ,
Mr: Grile. said staff held an orientation that included the City Attorney. In that orientation, they
discussed ex parte contact, and the role of being a quasi judicial decision maker. Planning in Oregon
was very complex.
City Attorney Joe Leahy said they had been able to spend a little longer during the orientation
meetings to have a collegial discussion and provide answers to questions as they arose. The planning
department had put together good orientation sessions. _ .
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 27, 2010.
Page 4
Mayor Leiken said a lot of it was passion on the part of the commissioner. He commended Ms. Moore,
who was in the audience, on her work on the Planning Commission.
3. Systems Development Charge (SDC) Adjustments to Create Development Incentives.
. Assistant Public Works Director Len Goodwin presented the staff report on this item. in July, 2009,
Council directed. staff to present alternatives that Council might consider with respect to adjusting
SDCs to provide economic development incentives. Staff would review. the four following
alternatives:
1. Authorize a developer to use SDC improvement credits granted for construction of a
qualified public improvement on any future development by that developer for which
application is made within 10 years of the date the credit was granted. .
2. Enter into an agreement with the Springfield Economic Development Agency (`.`SEDA")'
under which SEDA would agree to pay SDCs imposed on development that is consistent
with the target uses needed to help implement Springfield's Downtown District Urban
Design Plan and which occurs within a mutually agreed upon area of the Downtown
Urban Renewal District.
3. Base SDCs for redevelopment of a site on the net change in impact based upon the highest
documented use for which SDCs have actually been paid within a specified time period,
rather than the last documented use. He noted some possible dates tied in to latest updates
to facilities plans to go back to for this adjustment.
4. Allow a developer who reduces the intensity of use on a parcel to donate, to an entity _
. recognized under Section 501(c) (3) of the internal Revenue Code, units of impact
resulting from the reduced intensity of use.
Staff recommended moving forward on the first three .alternatives, but not taking action on alternative
4.
Mr. Goodwin explained each of the options.
Councilor Pishioneri said he didn't care for Option #4. He liked Option #l, but wasn't clear on
Options #2 and #3. He referred to Option #2 and asked how long it would be before the. City could see
the effect of SEDA paying the SDCs. ~ ~ .
Mr. Goodwin said it was possible that the SDCs wouldn't be paid in cash for a number of years. It
would be something the City and SEDA would need to consider. By having SEDA assume the SDCs
for a qualifying development, the cost of development would be reduced, making it easier for the.
development to go forward. If SEDA agreed to pay, SEDA would ultimately pay, perhaps in 20 or 30
years. If that scenario wasn't in place, it was possible that development would not happen. They were
trading the certainty of getting some SDCs now with the current discount program, or the likelihood
they would get the full amount of SDCs at a later date. SEDA must be in debt to continue to exist, and
assuming the SDCs would increase the level of debt, as long as it didn't reach the debt limit.
Mr. Grimaldi said Crandall Arambula spoke of the need for public money in projects to stimulate
development, and this was one tool.
Councilor Simmons said Option #1 seemed to be valid. He explained. The SEDA issue was a
mechanism, but he looked at. SEDA as more temporal rather than permanent. When we took SEDA
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 27, 2010
Page 5
dollars out of the mix and used it as SDCs, it messed with the premise of how-the SDC rates were
established. When there `~=as a growth in the tax base that they hoped would occur, that increase would
be used for development values. That may not be a sound thing to do. They would be taking foregone
tax revenue to not only benefit the community, but the private developer as well. SEDA would go
away. He felt that making it last longer was the wrong way to use the urban renewal. Option #3
seemed a devious mechanism to use. He didn't agree with Option #3. .
Mr. Goodwin said it was important that SEDA and.the Council be very careful about the decision to
invest tax increment revenue in infrastructure before investing in SDCs in Option #2. There was a
viable argument for Option #3 within the current facility plan context. If a developer built a facility
and paid SDCs based on impact, then built a facility that .had a lower impact and paid no SDCs, then
came back and built a development that used more impact, as long as it was within the current
planning horizon an argument could be made that the developer should be able to go back to the
highest, impact saying that infrastructure had already been paid for. If they went back too far, it
wouldn't work.
Councilor Simmons said if the facility was no longer in use, and was an inactive facility, under the
current process when it was redeveloped they would have to meet the current use and would have to
pay the SDCs. He asked for an example that this had occurred.
Mr. Grimaldi said the requirement to the developer to provide infrastructure needed to develop still
existed. If there was an impact on the transportation system that was direc_ tly attributed to the
development, that would still occur through the SDCs.
Councilor Simmons used the example of the Springfield Mall converting to the Winco site.
Mr. Goodwin said an example of this type of usage change was the Springfield Theater on Olympic
that was. changed to the Sonic Burger. As a theater, the facility had a larger impact than the Sonic
Burger. Sonic paid no SDCs because of the decrease in impact. If the Sonic Burger became a theater
again, the City would charge them full SDCs from the Sonic to the theater.
Councilor Simmons said that was a good point.
Councilor Lundberg said she was fine with Option #l, but it sounded like the option iii under Option
#1, which was transferring credits to another developer, sounded similar to Option #4.
Mr. Goodwin said Option #1 was transferring funds for a qualified public improvement and in Option
#4, credits were for downsizing. The concept was similar. The only city in Oregon that did that was
Newport, and they had never had anyone try to do the transfer.
Councilor Lundberg said it sounded like there was a lot of administrative accounting that needed to
occur in Option #l. The idea of the SDC credits was to encourage development, whether general
development or downtown development. She was keeping that in mind when looking at the options.
For Option #1, she would choose i and ii, but not iii. She would like to see less paperwork if possible. .
Mr. Goodwin said the paperwork was the need for Finance to go through the books each year to
identify the funds and also for the auditors to review it.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 27, 2010
Page 6
Councilor Lundberg said if it was an incentive, they needed to streamline as much as possible. In
Option #2, she supported i and ii. She still struggled with Option 3.
Mr. Goodwin discussed the difference between iii and iii. The City knew what some of the properties
were used for in the past, but it was before 1991 when they didn't pay any SDCs. The City did have
some receipts on businesses after 1991 that had paid SDCs. .
Councilor Lundberg said she would like more detail on each of the options under Option #3. She liked
the idea of encouraging development in downtown. It would take a lot of tools to encourage that
development. She was comfortable choosing Options #1, #2 and #3.
Councilor Ralston said he liked the innovative methods to stimulate growth. He asked if Option #2
would replace the 50% discount in' downtown SDCs.
Mr. Goodwin said that was correct. Staff recommended they no. longer have the 50% discount if they
chose to wait to collect from SEDA. The downtown discount was due to expire in 2011.
Councilor Ralston said part of Option #2 was to discontinue that discount. Yes. Under item ii of
Option #2, it mentioned discussing this with Willamalane and SUB. He asked if it might affect their
SDCs.
Mr, Goodwin said the City could meet with Willamalane and SUB if we wanted. them to do something
similar to what the City was proposing. The proposed option would only impact the local sewer, local
stormdrainage, and transportation SDCs. It didn't rely on Willamalane and SUB to do the same thing.
If they chose, to do the same, it would provide a more comprehensive development .incentive.
Councilor Ralston said it would be a good idea to let them know so they could decide on their own:
Mayor Leiken referred to Option #2 regarding SEDA payment of SDCs. SEDA oversaw two urban
renewal districts, but the focus seemed to be on downtown. He asked if there. was room to include
Glenwood in this proposal, particularly the annexed areas. He noted the Wildish site which was
annexed and was likely the largest site in the urban core. He strongly supported the downtown plan,
but. felt Glenwood had more infrastructure potential.
Mr. Goodwin said one reason they were not recommending Glenwood at this time was because there
was no updated Glenwood Refinement Plan. The tool to incentivize development consistent with the
plan was not yet in place. Once the Glenwood Refinement Plan was in place, it could be something for
Council to consider.
Mayor Leiken wanted to make sure they could transfer this option to Glenwood when the Refinement
Plan was updated: He felt there might be things that could be done downtown without relying totally
on the turn of the economy, while Glenwood was more dependent on the economy:
Mr. Goodwin said Glenwood would have greater infrastructure needs, so the Council would need to
determine if the loss of SDCs in Glenwood would be more of an issue in~Glenwood than in downtown. : .
Downtown would not have the same infrastructure needs.
Mayor Leiken referred to Option #4 which staff. was not recommending. He asked if there were things
in place when anon-profit was being built to keep the fees lower. Non-profits relied on grants and
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 27, 2010
Page 7
donations for their capital and operations. It made sense not to allow the transfer of SDCs as it may
not be an effective use of those funds, but he did feel there was a need.
Mr. Goodwin said this was specifically regarding a credit that theoretically was created: for downsizing
a use. That could be a different conversation if they wanted to talk about the stranded SDC credits and
whether or not those could be transferred to another entity or non-profit.
Councilor Ralston thought Option #1 allowed a developer to grant SDC credits. He asked if they
couldn't transfer those credits to anon-profit.
Mr. Goodwin said the proposal was only for that developer's next development. If the developer
wanted to go in and develop anon-profit enterprise, they could use their SDC credits for that use.
Mr. Leahy said Mr. Goodwin had done a great job putting this together. If the Council chose Option
# 1 and added the allowance to pass the credit on to someone other than the original developer, which
was what Eugene did, a developer could give those credits to anon-profit. That was not what staff
recommended, but could be done by expanding Option # 1.
Councilor Pishioneri said he liked how it was currently drafted. It could be a driving component for
developers to build another development and use their credits.
Mr. Goodwin said this happened rarely, maybe once or twice a year.
Mayor Leiken said people that had properties in downtown clearly wanted a partner in City Hall,
which could be working with SEDA. Option #2 sent a good message of a partnership with the City for
those wanting to redevelop downtown.
OTHER BUSINESS
Councilor Pishioneri asked Police Chief Smith to brief the Council on an incident over the last
weekend.
Chief Smith said there was riotous behavior at an intersection near the University of Oregon. People
were destroying public and private property and assets. Eugene Police initially responded, then called
for assistance from the Oregon State Police, the Lane County Sheriff's Office, Springfield Police, and
Junction City Police. Springfield responded with 9 officers who were put on the front line. There were
8 arrests, with one rather significant, but no injuries. One Springfield°officer was hit with a pop bottle.
The person arrested for the more serious charge was arrested by a Springfield officer.
Councilor Ralston asked if the City would get reimbursed.
Chief Smith said they would not be reimbursed. The City of Eugene and City of Springfield had an
agreement to assist each other when needed. He had asked one of the Captains to contact Eugene.
` about sending a bill to the University of Oregon.
Mr. Leahy said he attended the,City Attorney workshop during the League of Oregon Cities (LOC)
Conference. One of the best presentations they had was by Len Goodwin on street right of way,
franchises, taxes, utilities, and telecommunications. Mr. Goodwin did an excellent job of explaining
these topics.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
September 27, 2010
Page 8
ADJOURIv'MENT
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:45 p.m.
Minutes Recorder -Amy Sowa
~.-_-.`.
® ~)
_.
___ ~
Sidney . Leiken
May
Attest:
Amy Sowa
City Recorder