HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/16/2004 Regular
"
'", :
.
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL REGULAR MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, AUGUST 16,2004
The city of Springfield council met in special regular session in the Council Meeting Room, 225
Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, August 16, 2004, at 7:18 p.m., with Mayor Leiken
presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken, City Councilors Fitch, Woodrow, Lundberg, Ballew and Ralston,
Also present were City Manager Mike Kelly, Assistant City Manager Cynthia Pappas, City
Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa, and members of the staff.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Claims
2. Minutes
a. July 26,2004 - Work Session
b. July 26, 2004 - Special Regular Meeting
.
3. Resolutions
a, RESOLUTION NO. 04-37 - A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PERMIT UNDER
THE NOISE ORDINANCE ALLOWING OREGON DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION TO WORK ON A 24 HOUR BASIS BEGINNING FEBRUARY
L 2005 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30~ 2005 FOR THE I-105: WILLAMETTE RIVER
TO P ACIFIC HIGHWAY RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT.
4. Ordinances
5. Other Routine Matters
a. Authorize Staff to Apply for Approximately $1,000,000 in 2007-2008 Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) Transportation Enhancement Grant Funds for
Downtown Streetscape and Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Improvements.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR FITCH WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BALLEW
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5
FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
.
1. Proposed Glenwood Urban Renewal District and Resolution for a Ballot Measure Allowing
City Council Approval of Glenwood Urban Renewal Plan.
, :If.~'\
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 2
.
RESOLUTION NO. 04-38- A RESOLUTION REFERRING TO THE ELECTORS OF THE
CITY A BALLOT MEASURE AUTHORIZING AN URBAN RENEWAL PLAN
ALLOCATING TAXES FROM GLENWOOD PROPERTIES TO THE GLENWOOD
URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT PLAN.
Development Services Director Bill Grile presented the staff report on this item. At the July 26,
2004 Work Session, council considered potential Urban Renewal Districts in Downtown and
Glenwood, Council indicated a preference for proceeding with a 20-year Glenwood Urban
Renewal District in conjunction with Lane County if Lane County had a positive interest. Lane
County leadership has indicated positive support for Springfield's setting up a Glenwood Urban
Renewal District. Council needs to place a measure on the November 2,2004 ballot to meet City
Charter provisions. Voter approval would allow council to approve the Glenwood Urban Renewal
Plan.
With Lane County's approval the council can adopt an Urban Renewal District that includes areas
in Glenwood not yet annexed to the city. Key to Lane County's approving the Plan is involvement
with the city in constructing the list of projects. Attachment 1 included in the agenda packet
describes the process to establish the Glenwood Urban Renewal District.
.
As a preliminary draft Glenwood Urban Renewal Plan, Attachment 2 included in the agenda
packet provides general outlines of the text portion ofthe plan, a list of projects, and their
estimated costs in 2004 dollars. Numerous projects could be done in Glenwood depending on the
estimated revenue and the district's planned duration of20 years. Desired projects, their costs,
potential revenue, policies, duration of the Urban Renewal District, etc. are typically set by the
Urban Renewal Agency. Council established Springfield's Urban Renewal Agency in 1986: the
Springfield Economic Development Agency (SEDA). SEDA's powers and authority are exercised
by the governing body of the City of Springfield acting as the Urban Renewal Agency. The Mayor
and council would convene SEDA as the Urban Renewal Agency in September to begin that
process.
Approval of the proposed resolution (Attachment 3 in the agenda packet) places a measure on the
November 2, 2004 ballot. With voters approving the question, council could adopt the Glenwood
Urban Renewal Plan as required by provisions of the City Charter (Attachment 4 in the agenda
packet) and State Law.
Mr. Grile discussed what happens when a property within the Urban Renewal District (URD) is
annexed into the city and the tax revenue that would generate to both the city and the URD. The
plan with the project list is something that could stimulate council's discussion regarding this
plan. He acknowledged Bob Keefer, Superintendent from Willamalane Parks and Recreation
District, who was present in the audience. The total cost ofthe projects is an estimated guess, but
is a reasonable figure. He discussed the maximum allowable debt. Adjustments could be made
to the project list. He referred to the resolution before council tonight that would refer this to the
voters as is required in the city's charter. He referred to the steps and timeline involved in
preparing the plan and project list, putting the URD on the ballot, holding public hearings,
adopting the plan by the URD Board and receiving approval by the county.
Councilor Woodrow confirmed properties in the URD were not obligated to annex into the city.
He asked ifanybody's taxes would go up because ofthe URD.
.
, ,
Springfield City Council .
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 3
.
Mr. Grile said there should not be any tax increase. City staff and their consultant will be
researching that. Any tax increase at all would only be pennies a year if at all.
Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing.
1. Steve Roth, 4006 Franklin Boulevard, Eugene, OR. Mr. Roth thanked council for the
opportunity to comment tonight. Mr. Roth and his brother own about eight acres of riverfront
property in Glenwood and property along Franklin Boulevard. They own a couple of
businesses, including Camp Putt and Roaring Rapids. They have been very lucky at this
location with two successful businesses and they would like to see more successful
businesses in that area. Many areas besides Springfield have the ability to do tax increment
financing, the ability to work with developers and bring in upscale, positive development and
Springfield does not have that right now. He discussed the potential of the new off ramps
from Interstate 5, the proposed arena and other things that are happening in the community.
He would like to see urban renewal because it gives the City of Springfield the opportunity to
compete with other areas and to work with developers who are accustomed to that type of
financing mechanism. It offers opportunity. He thanked council for considering urban
renewal in Glenwood. He is very excited in seeing Glenwood reach its potential. He invited
council to come to Roaring Rapids and look at the riverfront area from their rooftop vantage
point.
.
2. Murray Petitt, 1011 Harlow Road, Suite 300, Springfield, OR. Mr. Petitt thanked council for
allowing him to speak. Mr. Petitt is a member of the Springfield Chamber of Commerce
Board of Directors and is Chair of the Springfield Chamber of Commerce Future Committee.
He spoke to express the Springfield Chamber of Commerce Board of Director's support for
the creation of an Urban Renewal District in Glenwood. The Chamber of Commerce has
taken an active role in Glenwood over the past several years, such as championing the issue
of jurisdictional change and sponsoring the Glenwood project as a partnership between the
Chamber and the University of Oregon (UofO) School of Architecture. Chamber support of
urban renewal in Glenwood is one more chapter in the Chamber's continuing involvement
and interest in Glenwood. He discussed two points of concern that some may have regarding
formation of the URD. The plan suggests approximately $32M for possible projects. It is
important for the public to understand the proposed project list does not commit the city, the
Urban Renewal Agency or the public to any decision about borrowing or incurring debt. The
project list simply establishes a list of actions that can be considered in much greater detail
and in the context of knowing there are sufficient dollar resources that would allow any debt
to be paid on favorable terms. The current assessed value of the land in Glenwood does not
reflect the highest and best use of this underdeveloped area. Glenwood has remained
underdeveloped for many years and may remain so for years to come without the assistance
of an URD. With an URD, the public will be making a significant statement that we will be
doing all we can to create a positive development climate for Glenwood. With this statement,
the private sector will see that there is public support for new growth and development in
Glenwood. The city can't develop Glenwood; it is up to the private sector to build the
developments. By creating an URD in Glenwood, the city will be doing everything it can to
attract the type of private sector development that could make Glenwood the destination
location that would make all of us proud.
.
3. Randy Hledik, P.O, Box 7428, Eugene, OR. Mr. Hledik spoke on behalf of Jim Wildish,
president of Wildish Industrial Development, Corporation. Mr. Hledik read a letter from Mr.
, ,
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16,2004
Page - 4
.
Wildish into the record and submitted the letter to the city recorder. The letter spoke in
support of an URD in Glenwood and the potential of the Glenwood area.
4. Bob Riecke, President ofPape Properties, 355 Good Pasture Island Road, Eugene, OR Pape
Properties owns property in the Glenwood area and would like to see the URD approved for
submittal onto the ballot. They feel the URD is a great tool and would provide an
opportunity to be proactive on this issue. Mr. Riecke noted his years living in the Portland
area and how Portland used the URD as a tool to revitalize areas and keep areas vital. He
would like to see that happen in this community as well.
5. Fred Simmons, 312 S. 52nd Place, Springfield, OR. Mr. Simmons said that if the URD is put
in place, and if they have willing sellers and willing buyers he could be supportive. If they
use the URD to use eminent domain to amalgamate for the purposes of development, he has a
constitutional objection. There is an impact on the General Fund and to the citizens of the
city. All URD funding is excluded from the General Fund and each of the other payers of
taxes has to pay a proportional amount higher. Growth costs money. He agrees that it is a
great idea to develop Glenwood, but if there is an impact on the citizens of Springfield, that
impact must be included in the information shared with the citizens so they can make a
decision based on those facts. He is not opposed to development, but is opposed to
confiscation through eminent domain and untruthfulness about the financial costs.
.
6. Steve Moe, P.O. Box 847, Springfield, OR. Mr. Moe said urban renewal in the 1960's
involved condemning blocks of homes and building high-rise, low-rent apartments. He
believes, however, that if urban renewal is used in the appropriate manner, it could be a tool
to begin the rebuild ofa community. He is in support of using urban renewal in the
Glenwood area, not as a method of condemning blocks of houses and displacing people, but
as a tool to selectively take underutilized areas, provide up-to-date infrastructure and allow
for redevelopment. He is not supportive of using urban renewal in the core residential area of
Glenwood as those people are happy and love their neighborhood. He asked council to leave
those neighbors alone, but to use urban renewal to develop the industrial and commercial
areas that were built fifty to seventy-five years ago and haven't been touched since. He
described Franklin Blvd. in the earlier years. Most open property on Franklin Blvd. was
businesses or homes, but over the years has been in decline. The assessed value over the past
ten years has actually decreased. Urban renewal unchecked can do a lot of damage, but if
used as a tool, with input from the citizens, working together, it could make a better
Glenwood. Glenwood could be a doorway between both cities and a place where people
would be excited to live in new housing units, work in new businesses, shop in the new
stores, use the new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and visit the river. It is time to rebuild the
Glenwood community. He referred to a quote in the Register Guard and asked that council
wait until after the public hearing to make their decision.
.
7. Eric Marvin, 7107 SE 30th Avenue, Portland, OR. Mr, Marvin represented his father, Phil
Marvin, who owns about eight acres in Glenwood north of the bridge into Springfield. He
believes the continuity and consistency that a plan would bring to the area would be positive
and very important. It could bring so much to the area that it is currently lacking. The plan
coupled with the tax increment financing, the infrastructure and the caliber of sustainable
design it would bring, would make the area very special. The URD agency would be able to
steer how they want the community to grow. The redevelopment could allow them to focus
the money how they want to, such as for affordable housing. No one will be left behind if
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 5
.
council does not want them to be left behind. It is very exciting and would be a positive
move for Glenwood.
.
8. Bob Keefer, Superintendent, Willamalane Parks and Recreation, 200 South Mill Street,
Springfield, OR. Mr. Keefer represented Willamalane Parks and Recreation District. Mr.
Keefer discussed the meeting in June with Springfield Community Development Manager
John Tamulonis, Development Services Director Bill Grile and the Willamalane Board in
which they discussed an Urban Renewal District either in Glenwood, Downtown or both. At
that time, the board was generally in support of either districts looking after the long-term
good of this community and having another tool. There is the opportunity that it could
decrease some revenue to Willamalane. The board is looking for a win-win and this is one of
those tools that could bring about that outcome. Willamalane has had a strong partnership in
the last few years with the city. The board understands the city has some big issues and
would like to partner with the city to assist in this endeavor. Willamalane recently completed
their Comprehensive Plan which includes improvements in Glenwood. Very little of those
improvements were going to be funded within their current budget. This is an opportunity for
Willamalane to fund some of those improvements and that is where the situation becomes
win-win, The city and Willamalane will hold a joint meeting on September 27 and he would
like them to take this discussion further at that time. Willamalane would be happy to have
another conversation regarding urban renewal if this measure passes on the November ballot,
to discuss more specific projects. On a personal note, when he lived in Bend, he saw tax
increment financing as a great tool in the downtown. It also made big improvements in the
parks and the ability to enjoy the parks. He encouraged council to take this opportunity to
look at this very seriously. Willamalane will be looking for a win-win when they partner
with the city,
Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing.
Mr. Kelly spoke on the issue of condemnation which was brought up by Mr. Simmons during his
testimony. There is a perception that URD sometimes condemn and take properties. The City of
Springfield does not have a history of doing much condemnation. The city council will be the
board of the Urban Renewal Agency and will decide if they will condemn or not. There is not
much difference in their powers as City Council and as the Board of the Urban Renewal Agency
regarding condemnation. If they chose to condemn properties for infrastructure or for economic
development, they could do it in either capacity. Creating a board does not create unlimited
powers they do not currently have regarding condemnation. There is another concern of the
subsidy during the twenty year period, If council assumes that all the projects would take place
anyway, it could be viewed as subsidies and that the increased taxes could have been invested. If
council assumes that with the advantage ofURD, with the ability to aggregate properties if they
chose to do so with willing sellers or through condemnation and with placing infrastructure there,
and that all of Glenwood could be used, it could encourage larger developers because of these
things. If that is the view, the city would be in a better position throughout the life of the URD.
If we can attract development quicker because of urban renewal, the properties would annex more
quickly and the tax base would apply. In that case, there could be a benefit. It is an issue of
whether they feel the development would occur anyway, or whether they feel that with this tool
more valued development would occur, benefiting the tax base because properties would annex to
the city at a quicker rate than they would have without the urban renewal.
.
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 6
.
Councilor Ballew spoke in support of the URD. For voters to approve this gives council
permission to begin a process that will involve more public involvement and partnering with
other agencies. This process will lead council to determine how they will do this.
Councilor Ralston said his main problem with URD is that the area is too large. Also, twenty
years is a long time to forego benefits he feels will happen anyway. He discussed the concern
that undesirable development could go in without the URD, but he feels there are other ways to
control what development occurs. He is also concerned because the people that are most affected
by this will not be able to vote on this. He feels better knowing the council would be the
governing body and would have control. He is still not convinced it is not a subsidy. There may
be a benefit to the city in twenty years, if we make it the twenty years, but it will not help balance
our budget over the next several years. He was relieved to hear that as businesses annex to the
city, the city would be able to add them to the tax roles. Other than his concerns about the size of
the district, the length of time the district would be in place and the citizens affected, he is sitting
on the fence on this issue. Ultimately, it is up to the citizens. If the citizens approve, he will be
supportive.
.
Councilor Fitch said representing the Glenwood area has been a pleasure. She referred to the
many meetings she has attended with the citizens in that area. We have a beautiful community
here and we also have an urban growth boundary (UGB). Within the UGB, the challenge is to try
to develop and redevelop to the highest use, so we do not continually expand, and allow use to
maintain some of our green areas. The URD is one way of taking an area and helping it
redevelop, and updating our plan as it progresses. The community and the city can do the things
it does well such as streets and infrastructure, to accommodate development. Councilors have
said we may have the development anyway. She looks at Glenwood now and the pride the
citizens have in that area. She wants that pride to grow. As council brings this forward, they will
be asking citizens for their trust to allow the city to implement this district. The city has the
partnerships they are known for to make something better together. They can create a vision that
everyone will be proud of. This is the moment to ask citizens to allow council to continue
discussions.
Mayor Leiken said he missed the work session on this topic. He discussed the ribbon cutting at
the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) temporary bridge and that Jeff Sheik, Region
Manager from ODOT talked about the interchanges into Glenwood. He read the editorial in the
Register Guard which said the offramp from I-5 into Glenwood is a great opportunity for a grand
entrance into both communities. Glenwood is the gateway to the Willamette. He said there is an
opportunity to work with citizens and to convince citizens urban renewal is a great idea and tool.
Over the last twenty-five years, some of the most stringent regulations have been put on
businesses, He discussed the enterprise zone which is also a subsidy in a sense, but it brings in
big business. Urban renewal is a tool and an opportunity for the city to work with the private
sector to make something happen. This will be a lasting legacy for Springfield and for
Glenwood. He would hope council would approve this tonight and talk with citizens about the
possible benefits of this to Springfield, such as job creations and the opportunities for the citizens
to work, play and have fun in our community.
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR FITCH WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BALLEW
TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 04-38 WITH THE EXHIBIT A PROVIDED WHICH
SPECIFIES THAT THE PLAN DURATION WOULD BE 20 YEARS. THE BALLOT TITLE
ADOPTED IS THE ONE THAT REFLECTS THE THOUGHT PROCESSES FROM THE
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16,2004
Page - 7
.
WORK SESSION WHICH INCLUDE THE PLAN DURATION WOULD BE 20 YEARS. THE
MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 AND 0 AGAINST.
2. Public Safety Facility Bond Measure.
RESOLUTION NO. 04-39 - A RESOLUTION REFERRING TO THE ELECTORS OF THE
CITY A BALLOT MEASURE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $28,650,000 IN
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS TO FmANCETHECONSTRUCTIONOFA
POLICE/COURT AND MUNICIPAL JAIL FACILITY AND RELATED
IMPROVEMENTS; AND AUTHORIZING OTHER MATTERS IN CONNECTION
THEREWITH.
Police ChiefJerry Smith presented the staff report on this item. Council has discussed
constructing a new public safety facility and a municipal jail.
The facility housing the police, court and city prosecutor was originally constructed in 1949 and
1957 and has undergone several remodels. The facility was not constructed to house a police
department and in fact consists of two separate contiguous buildings. The current facility
contains a lObed jail.
.
The current facility consists of approximately 24,000 square feet and because of design, presents
cost prohibitive or structural prohibitions to expansion. A companion discussion to the issue of
constructing a new public safety facility is a decision on whether to construct a municipal jail.
The current police facility houses a ten bed jail that is used as a holding facility after years of use
as a municipal jail.
Berry Architects performed a Space Needs Study in 1999 that has been used for cost projections
as we move forward in discussions. Heery International, Inc. updated these cost figures resulting
in a construction cost of $24,065,136 for a facility to house police, municipal court, prosecutor
and a municipal jail. These construction costs are based on two separately constructed buildings.
Additional costs for land acquisition, fees, site preparation, demolition and financing costs bring
the total cost to $28,650,000. This would equate to an assessment of$.87 per thousand. A
facility that did not include a municipal jail would cost $18,830,000 and require an assessment of
$.57 per thousand,
If a decision were made to construct a municipal jail as part of the public safety facility, some
construction cost savings could be realized.
A concept drawing depicting the proposed Public Safety Facility and Jail was distributed during
the work session and was on display at the Council Regular Meeting.
Chief Smith said discussions regarding a new police facility have taken place since 1995 and a
jail was also part of the discussions. He referred to the Space Needs Study conducted in 1999.
Staff has concluded there is enough city owned land on the current Police Department site to
accommodate a new facility. The resolution and ballot title are before council tonight for their
consideration and adoption if they choose.
.
Chief Smith referred to the companion issue of operating costs for a jail. Staff will work on that
component. Some ideas revolving around funding for staffing the jail include the formation of a
fIre district which would free up General Fund money, working with Lane County criminal
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 8 .
.
justice partners to fmd a solution to resolve the capacity issues, and increasing the current levy
that funds staffing in the police department that is subject for renewal in 2006. He thanked staff,
including Carole Knape! and Mike Harman, the DLR Group, ECONorthwest, and Heery
International. Many hours have been put in from other staff on this item as well.
Councilor Ballew asked why the ballot title stated eighty beds, when discussion included one
hundred beds. She asked which number was correct.
Chief Smith said the capacity is for one hundred beds. There are forty cells, each could house
two inmates, but there are additional holding areas that could provide for another twenty people.
Mr. Kelly said Mr. Leahy would research this and make it clear in the ballot title.
Mayor Leiken opened the public hearing.
.
1. Dan Egan, 850 N. 6th Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Egan is the Executive Director of the
Springfield Chamber of Commerce, but spoke as a citizen of Springfield, not on behalf of the
Chamber. When visitors come to the Chamber, they ask about employment, housing,
neighborhoods, schools, and public safety. Public safety is quite high on their list of
priorities. They soon become aware of our high property crime rate. He has a growing
appreciation of public safety issues. It has been frustrating in his role, serving on the Lane
County Law Enforcement Finance subcommittee, looking to business leaders in the county to
try to address the high crime rate. He does not feel that Lane County will resolve this
problem in the near future. He is concerned about Springfield, because when people come
here, they are looking to live in Springfield, not Lane County. It is frustrating that there is no
solution to the petty crimes that go unchecked because there is no capacity. IUs time to give
the citizens a choice to find a solution. Give citizens the opportunity to make up their own
minds. We have to turn this around because we don't want to have that type of reputation out
there.
2. Fred Simmons, 312 S. 52nd Place, Springfield, OR. Mr. Simmons said the reality is the Police
Facility building is in terrible condition. The police officers go out on the street and arrest
people. It costs about $700 to transport them to the jail, they get turned loose, and they are
rearrested again and again. The cost of doing nothing is substantial. Springfield ranks very
high in property crimes in the state. Council's discussion earlier during their work session
regarding deferring building until operating costs was interesting. The poll results suggest a
substantial majority of the citizens support the creation of this facility. The county will not
resolve this issue, so the city needs to move forward. He favors about eighty dollar per year
range, but it does need to be funded, not like the juvenile facility. Springfield citizens want
the opportunity to vote on this and want the facts. The police officers, the courts and the
community will be in support.
.
3. Cheryl O'Neill, 24307 High Pass Road, Junction City, OR. Ms. O'Neill is the Assistant
Director of Women space. Most domestic violence situations are misdemeanors at this time
and if this jail is to cover misdemeanors, it would cover these crimes. There are serious
crimes in the city that are considered misdemeanor. She discussed the difference of
misdemeanor and felonies. It will make a big difference to have control over those who have
committed misdemeanors. There is wonderful work being done in batterer intervention in the
community, but they need to be able to keep the people in the program and cannot without
some type of punishment or sanction for those who do not follow through. There is currently
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 9
.
no leverage. A municipal jail could make a big difference and she appreciates that council is
considering this issue.
4. James Strickland, 384 Brookside Drive, Eugene, OR. Judge Strickland is the presiding judge
of the Springfield Municipal Court. One issue that is not understood is whether or not the jail
would have an affect on the felons that are being released from the Lane County jail. Most
people involved in a property crime spree, commit a number of felonies, but also commit a
few misdemeanors. He gave an example of someone the city could hold on a misdemeanor,
who was matrixed out on the felony. There are a number of cases where the Municipal Jail
could be used to hold someone on the misdemeanor crime, who also commits felonies on a
continual basis. He told a story of his wife's co-worker who had a vehicle stolen. Because of
this theft, this woman could not get to her job at 6:00a.m., and her husband had to arrange his
schedule to take the children to school. For some, a car theft is just an inconvenience, but to
others it is devastating and becomes an economic disaster. He hopes the council will put this
out to the citizens to vote on and it will be approved.
.
5. Cecil Saxon, 4740 Main Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Saxon said he appreciated the
opportunity to speak before council. Mr. Saxon has had businesses in Springfield and he
employs people in Springfield. His prime concern is that crimes, and not just petty crimes,
are being committed during daylight hours. He referred to armed robberies that have
occurred during daylight hours. He discussed what it does to the labor force when someone
has a gun put to their head. There should be no quibbling about whether or not a jail is
needed. He referred to Eugene's policy regarding crime. Springfield has a police department
that is serious. He commended the police chief, the judge, and the prosecuting attorney for
speaking out for a jail. Council should appreciate the fact that the city employs this caliber of
people and a dedicated police force. He discussed the fact that petty crime can equate to big
dollars. He gave examples of theft on his property and Weyerhaeuser property. No one is
immune to this. He discussed having a pick up stolen on Main Street and he does not
consider that a petty crime. He feels Springfield should show the City of Eugene, Lane
County and the District Attorney that we take care of our problems. Ifwe are doing
something in Springfield, it could come back to Eugene. He has a lot of money invested in
this community and he is proud to be a citizen ofthis community.
.
6. Steve Singleton, 252 North 65th Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Singleton spoke in support of
the ballot measure for the new police station and jail. He wants the full meal deal. As
chairman of Springfield's Police Planning Task Force (PPTF), he and other members have
studied the need and feasibility of a new jail facility. The police facility is literally falling
down around those who work there. He addressed the need for a jail. As a private citizen, he
supports this ballot measure in its entirety. He discussed cost versus consequence. The
criminal element in our community views our justice system with disdain and impunity.
There is a prevailing climate of disrespect of the law and the consequence of breaking it,
because there are no consequences. The only cost to criminals would be a few hours of
inconvenience while paperwork is completed and they are matrixed out. Many times, they
are matrixed out before the police officer has finished writing the paperwork that put them
there in the fIrst place. The criminals know the system well. Mr. Singleton is also a victim of
crime in this community. He had a substantial burglary in his home while his family was
upstairs sleeping, In two months, there were five vandalisms and one major burglary during
the construction of the new church building he pastors. His family was the victim of a hit
and run where the driver ran into and totaled Mr. Singleton's car. The driver was drunk when
this occurred and had fifteen outstanding Driving While Suspended citations. After the driver'
, .
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16,2004
Page - 10
.
was arrested, she was back driving within twenty-four hours. He knows because she was his
neighbor. She never had to post bail. When there is no cost to the criminal the consequences
will be ours. He has weighed the costs and the consequence of this ballot measure, and the
cost pales in comparison to the consequences that we, as a community will suffer if crime is
allowed to go unchecked and unpunished. The ballot measure for the police station with the
jail could amount to less than twenty-five cents a day for citizens. Considering the
alternative, he considers that a real bargain. He agrees that people should vote and it should
be each of our responsibility. Commissioner Dwyer was concerned of being taxed to death,
but he would much rather take the chance knowing that it will never happen, than being
stolen blind or worse.
Mayor Leiken closed the public hearing.
Mr. Leahy said he checked on the ballot title and it can be changed to one hundred beds from
eighty beds. In terms of their opinion of what can be constructed, it is fine as long as it is one
hundred or less. The only political issue might be that someone notes they voted for one hundred
beds and only seventy were constructed. The ballot title will state approximately one hundred
beds.
Councilor Ballew said she thinks within the ballot measure it should tell people how much it
would cost to operate the jail. It does not need to state how it would be financed, but she thought
the cost was important information.
Discussion was held regarding the word limit on the ballot title.
.
Mayor Leiken said the operating costs are just a good guess at this point.
Mr. Kelly said there is a range of gross costs from $lAM to $1.7M. There is certain debate on
what the net costs would be. The gross figure could be reduced anywhere from $400,000 to
$700,000 based on forfeiture of fmes and bails and whether or not we are able to rent bed spaces
in a couple of years to Eugene. If they were to put a cost, it would be council's decision whether
to put the gross costs in or the net costs, Either one would be a guess.
Councilor Woodrow thanked everyone who spoke during the public hearing. He is also on the
PPTF and supports this measure. He is in awe of the men and women who put their life in danger
to protect him and his family and to not give them the tools to do their job properly is a disgrace.
He would like to ask the citizens of Springfield to get in touch with the City Council or staff so
they can get the information to make this decision. This is important to Springfield, the citizens
and to our quality oflife that we are so proud of in Oregon.
Councilor Lundberg suggested that it is not as important to include the amount of the operating
costs, but that there is a clear understanding that the operating dollars are not included. It is hard
to understand that a bond measure only pays for construction costs and very little else. It would
be sufficient enough to say something to the affect that operating funds will come separately, or
the voters will be asked for an operating levy in the future.
Councilor Ballew said it is important to clarify the magnitude to operate a jail.
.
Councilor Fitch suggested the additional sentence "Operating funds are not included".
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16,2004
Page - 11
.
Mr. Kelly said staff will be approaching council to see ifthey would like to fund a small public
information campaign. Typically, the city does this when council proposes a measure. The city
tries to put out facts. The city is not allowed to put out information that leads the voter to make a
decision, but can put out, at public expense, a fact sheet with questions and answers. Council
could, in that document, include information about the operating costs that are not included in this
ballot measure. The operating costs would be a separate issue in 2006.
Councilor Fitch noted there was a letter from David Lewis, Vice President from the Springfield
Police Association (SPA), in support of the police facility and jail. The letter also noted that the
SPA would support through this proposal financial resources to help with a Political Action
Committee (PAC) if this were to go forward to the voters. This letter was entered into the public
record.
Councilor Fitch said these two measures have brought home the amount of leadership and
decision making council must do. Four or five years ago if asked if they wanted to be in the jail
business, the answer would have been no. It is still not something they would choose to do, but
the reality is that there is a cost to doing nothing. There is no accountability when people choose
not to obey law. The number one priority of citizens is public safety. This is the opportunity to
look at what they want done efficiently. Looking at the cost side of this, council does not want to
build something without looking at how to fund the operation. If nothing is done, police officers
continue arresting, but with no consequence to the criminal. She is very supportive of this and
will be out there trying to persuade citizens to vote for this and to vote.
.
Mayor Leiken said there has been strong testimony from the public tonight and he appreciates all
of them. Council does have to make a motion based on information. Everyone is affected by
crime in one way or another. There are many people who do not report some crimes and are not
part of the statistic.
Mr. Leahy went through the ballot title, referring to several deletions of the words "the", "a",
"also", and "city". The year the existing facility was built should be changed to "1949", from
"1947". He explained that dollar signs are counted as separate words. He added the following
sentence at the end: "Gross cost of operation as presently estimated would be approximately
$1,400,000." The reason he worded it that way is because we will have to get an opinion from
the bond council that the bonds can be sold for the purposes described. He does not know if the
addition of that sentence will be accepted by the bond council, so he did not want to make it set in
cement, but rather to state that this is the best information we have now. It is a good faith
representation of where we are to the voters, but in the event it is slightly more or less, the bonds
don't rise or fall on that. We are simply providing information at this point to the voter because
that is what council wants.
Councilor Ballew said the words 'estimated' and 'approximately' are similar. She suggested
shortening the sentence by stating, "the bond cost is estimated at $_ ".
Councilor Ralston said he would prefer stating the net cost rather than the gross.
Mr. Kelly said one option could just be to state that "operating costs are not included in this
proposal" and not get into whether it is gross or net costs.
.
Councilor Lundberg said listing the gross costs does not make it clear that it is not part of what
the public is buying. She suggested stating only that operational costs are not included or leave
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 12
.
that part off the ballot title completely. Leave it up to the city to make sure that piece of
information is well distributed. She would have a tendency to leave it off because it makes it
more confusing rather than clarifying.
Councilor Ballew said she discussed this with her own father, who is supportive of a jail, but
remarked that it doesn't include the cost of running it. It is so important that citizens feel fully
informed.
Councilor Ralston said it should be in there somewhere.
Mayor Leiken asked council for direction on whether or not to include a dollar figure of the
operational costs in the ballot.
Mr. Leahy said including "Operating costs are not included in these bonds" would fit, too.
Councilor Woodrow asked if there was room to include "Operating costs of $1 ,400,000 are not
included" .
Ms, Pappas said there is room to include that sentence. If it only states, "Operating costs are not
included", people will ask how much those costs would be.
Mr. Kelly said his recommendation would be to leave the ballot title as proposed, amended with
the corrections within the summary, with direction to staff to emphasize the operating costs issue
in the public information campaign.
.
Mayor Leiken asked for a show of hands of those wanting the $1,400,000 included and those not
wanting the cost included.
Councilor Lundberg said her first choice would be to leave the ballot title alone, but to direct city
staff to include the operational costs in the public information campaign.
Mr. Leahy said they could direct city staff to include that information in the public information
campaign.
Councilor Fitch said she does not want to include the costs in the ballot title. She referred to the
second motion council would be making and directing that the information campaign spells out
the operating costs. The jail component would not be built until there was a source for those
costs and a more exact figure. The numbers need to be more accurate before including those in
the ballot title. It is going to be one and a half to two years before construction begins. She
would opt to have a separate motion stating that the jail component would not be constructed until
funding has been identified. That could be spelled out in the informational campaign.
Councilor Ballew said many people only know what is on the ballot, not in the information
campaign.
.
Councilor Ralston said there is a negative feeling by the community regarding the Lane County
juvenile facility that was built, but is not operational because oflack of operational funds. He
wants people to know that if approved, the city will be committed to staff the facility. He doesn't
want any confusion about that. He would support whatever it takes to do that. He suggested "If
approved, funding will be worked out" or something to that affect.
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 13
.
Mr. Kelly referred to his discussion with council during their work'session regarding contact with
the bond council because staff knew they would recommend to council to not sell the bonds to
construct the jail until council feels it has sufficient resources to staff the jail. Staff prepared a
motion that indicates that if the measure passes in November, we could proceed with the design
of the full facility including the jail, proceed with construction of the police building, court and
prosecutor activities, but no bond would be sold for the construction of the jail until we have
adequate staffing in place and council certified the bond council by passing a resolution stating
sufficient resources for staffing the jail are identified. According to the bond council, it becomes
a contingency that will interfere with the sale of the bonds for the jail until we certify that we
have sufficient staffing. Staff wanted to do this to insure the voters and Lane County that
although we are seeking voter authorization for as much as $28,650,000, until we have the
staffing plan, the expenditure for the jail will not be spent. That condition is on the bonds with
the subsequent motion that staff has prepared for council consideration.
Councilor Ralston said if the citizens approve this, they are approving the jail as part of the
concept. If in five years, the city determines they cannot identify funding to staff the jail, the
citizens have approved something that will not happen. He doesn't want that situation either. If
they pass this, he wants them to know they will have a jail. The voters may be voting for the jail
and expecting a jail.
.
Mayor Leiken said there are individuals in the community who would gather signatures and
challenge this if it doesn't sit right with them. It is important to make sure it is written in a way
that there is an understanding involved. We need something in writing that states the operating
costs are not included.
Councilor Ballew said we could compromise by leaving the dollar amount out of the ballot title or
put certain words in bold.
Mr. Leahy read the different options:
"Gross operating costs are not included,"
"Gross costs of operation presently estimated at $1,400,000 are not included."
"Gross operating costs estimated at $1,400,000 per year are not included in the bonds."
Councilor Ballew suggested, "Annual operating costs estimated at $1,400,000 are not included."
Councilor Fitch added, "Gross" in front of "annual operating costs".
Discussion was held regarding putting words in bold.
Mr. Leahy said we would delete the words he referred to earlier, change "80" to "100", change
"1947" to "1949", and add a sentence at the end that says, "Gross annual operating costs
estimated at $1,400,000 are not included".
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR FITCH WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BALLEW
TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 04-39 WITH THE CHANGES NOTED WITH EXHIBIT A
WITH THE BALLOT TITLE. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0
AGAINST.
.
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 14
.
Mr. Leahy noted that "are not included" should perhaps be changed to "would not be included"
so it doesn't assume the measure will pass.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR FITCH WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BALLEW
TO CORRECT THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE PER THE CITY ATTORNEY FROM "ARE
NOT INCLUDED" TO "WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED". THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 5 FOR A 0 AGAINST.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR FITCH WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BALLEW
THAT THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE JAIL
COMPONENT OF THE POLICE, COURTS AND CITY PROSECUTOR FACILITY
NOT OCCUR UNTIL THE COUNCIL IS SATISFIED THAT THERE IS PROPER
FUNDING FOR STAFFING AND OPERATIONS OF THE JAIL; HOWEVER, THE
BONDS CAN BE ISSUED FOR PRELIMINARY EXPENDITURES INCLUDING
DESIGN OF THE ENTIRE FACILITY AND FOR CONSTRUCTION OF POLICE,
COURTS AND CITY PROSECUTOR FACILITIES. THE MOTION PASSED WITH
A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
Mayor Leiken thanked the audience for their patience. This is a very important topic and an
enormous step. He thanked the City Attorney for his assistance with the language on the ballot
title and Finance Director Bob Duey and his staff.
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
.
1. Curtiss Greer, 357 55th Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Greer read from his letter regarding the
recent increase in sewer rates and the premature charges for those rates. His letter was
entered into the public record. Mr. Greer did speak with staff regarding this issue and feels
no one is being held accountable.
Ms. Pappas said Mr. Greer is correct. The billing does reflect back one month and the
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) staff and city staff are working on
this issue with the Springfield Utility Board (SUB), who is the city's billing partner.
Mayor Leiken noted that Mr. Greer had also talked to him about this issue. As soon as possible,
the Mayor and council would like to hear from staff on the resolution of this problem.
Mr. Kelly said staff would include a memo in next week's Communication Packet to council.
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
.
1. Correspondence from Susan Ban, Vice President, Lane Transit District (LID) Board of
Directors, P.O. Box 7070, Eugene, OR Regarding Local Match for Pioneer Parkway EmX
Line.
2. Correspondence from Steve Stermer, Board President, Springfield Museum Board, 590 Main
Street, Springfield, OR Regarding Balance of Operating Cash Account.
(please see attached staff response.)
3. Correspondence from Nick Shevchynski, 2347 Marcola Road, Springfield, OR 97477
Regarding Objections to the City's Costs and Disbursements.
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 15
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR FITCH WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BALLEW
TO ACCEPT THE CORRESPONDENCE FOR FILING. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
BUSINESS FROM THE COUNCIL
1. Councilor Fitch reminded council that although they are on recess, there is a TEAM
Springfield meeting on Wednesday, August 18.
2. Councilor Woodrow has been selected by Commissioner Bobby Green and the chair of the
Public Safety Coordinating Council to go to the Governor's Summit on Juvenile Justice in
September in Clackamas. He will attend a preliminary meeting on that tomorrow with local
staff.
3. Mayor Leiken reported on the ribbon cutting of the temporary I-5 bridge. This week he will
meet with several other mayors and the Governor to discuss several issues, particularly those
related to cities. Marty Brantley, Oregon Economic and Community Development
Department (OECDD) Director will also be attending this meeting.
4. Councilor Ballew reminded council ofthe Health Center opening on Friday, August 20 with
Senator Wyden. There is also a Work Force Partnership meeting with both Senator Wyden
and Congressman DeFazio on Friday.
Mayor Leiken noted that Senator Ron Wyden will be in the community for the next week.
.
5. Councilor Ralston discussed the inserts he receives for the Development Code and Municipal
Code,
Councilor Ballew suggested keeping only one copy which could be available in the City
Manager's Office and council can just access these documents online or in the office.
Council will bring in their old notebooks to be recycled.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
1. Council Initiation of a Type II, Site Specific Text Amendment of Metropolitan Area General
Plan (Metro Plan) Regarding the Provision of Fire and Emergency Medical Services in the
City Limits of Springfield.
Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. A proposal last year to
provide fIre and emergency medical services within the city through annexation to Willakenzie
Fire District was denied by the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission because
the proposal was "not consistent with the policies of the Metro Plan." To eliminate the
recurrence of that particular conclusion, the proposed Metro Plan text amendments specifically
allow Springfield and a special district provider to enter into an urban services agreement for the
provision of fIre and emergency medical services within the city limits of Springfield.
.
On February 6, 2004, the Lane County Boundary Commission denied an application of the city to
annex to the Willakenzie Fire District. The Boundary Commission based this decision on the
absence of Metro Plan policies specifically supporting the provision of fire service through urban
service agreement. Representatives from Lane County appeared at the hearing and voiced similar
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page - 16
.
opinions. Because fire and emergency medical services are not a requirement of state-wide land
use goals concerning public services (Goal 11), and because Oregon Revised Statutes specifically
provide for cities and counties to enter into urban services agreements with special district
providers, the proposed site-specific Metro Plan text amendment allowing for such an agreement
for the City of Springfield is presented for council consideration.
Mr. Mott said it is staff s hope that the proposed text amendment will enable the city to go
forward in a similar fashion to the Boundary Commission in the event that we arrive at an
agreeable position with whoever happens to be providing fIre and life safety service as a special
district provider without the question of compliance with the Metropolitan Plan. Weare still
living under a system that requires a political decision to be forced through a land use process.
This amendment would simplify that process.
Councilor Woodrow asked if Lane County and the City of Eugene would have to approve this
amendment.
Mr. Mott said Springfield's City Manager, City Attorney and himself are meeting with the Lane
County counsel and County Administrator on Tuesday, August 17, to confirm they do not have to
approve this amendment.
Councilor Ralston said he is strongly opposed to the fIre district, not because of the Metro Plan,
but because he feels the citizens do not want to pay double for services. He would have felt better
if we had gotten approval from the citizens fIrst. He will not approve the changes as they are.
.
Councilor Fitch said she would love our citizens to have the opportunity to vote on this, but
without initiating this change for Springfield only, that right was taken away by the Lane County
Boundary Commission. The reason it was taken away was because of the Metro Plan. Whether
or not we have a fIre district or not should be up to citizens. Without this change, they do not
even have the opportunity to vote.
Councilor Ralston asked if the citizens would have an opportunity to vote for a fire district if we
change the language in the Metro Plan, and Lane County and Eugene both agree to the change.
Mr. Kelly said last year when the council agreed to send the fIre district item to the Lane County
Boundary Commission, they determined that if the Boundary Commission approved it, council
would bring it to the voters by a remonstrance vote by their own initiation. If the city can craft
language that does not require approval by Lane County and City of Eugene, the fIre district
would again go to the Boundary Commission at some point in the future. The Boundary
Commission must still approve. Based on the motion of this council, they could take it
immediately to a vote of the people. It would be council's choice.
.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR FITCH WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR BALLEW
TO APPROVE INITIATING THE PROCESS OF METRO PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT, AS
PROVIDED IN CHAPTER IV PLAN REVIEW, AMENDMENT. AND REFINEMENT OF THE
METRO PLAN AND ARTICLE 7 METRO PLAN AMENDMENTS OF THE SPRINGFIELD
DEVELOPMENT CODE, TO ALLOW THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD THE OPTION TO
PROVIDE FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS
THROUGH URBAN SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH SPECIAL DISTRICT PROVIDERS.
THE MOTION FAILED WITH A VOTE OF 2 FOR (FITCH, WOODROW) AND 3 AGAINST
(RALSTON, BALLEW AND LUNDBERG).
Springfield City Council
Special Regular Meeting Minutes - August 16, 2004
Page-17
.
Mr. Leahy asked for a motion by council to direct him to insert the word "jail" before the word
"operating" in the last sentence of the Public Safety Facility ballot title.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR BALLEW WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR FITCH
TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO INSERT THE WORD "JAIL" BEFORE THE WORD
"OPERATING" IN THE LAST SENTENCE OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY BALLOT
TITLE. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
Mayor Leiken referred to the last topic that was discussed relating to the Metro Plan amendment.
With strong momentum the Lane County Boundary Commission may be eliminated. This is the
last boundary commission in the State of Oregon. He asked where the question of a fIre district
would go if the Boundary Commission were eliminated. It would go to the Lane County Board
of Commissioners.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
t.
Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa
.
Attest
~~~
Amy So
City Recorder
.