Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/07/2011 RegularCity of Springfield Regular Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCII, HELD MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2011 The City. of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, March 7 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Pishioneri, VanGordon, Wylie (by conference ' phone), Moore, Ralston, and Woodrow. 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. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led.by Mayor Lundberg. SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT _ r CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Claims 2. Minutes a. February 7, 2011 -Regular Meeting b. February 14, 2011- Work Session c. February 22, 2011 -Work Session d. February 22, 2011 -Regular Meeting 3. Resolutions a. RESOLUTION NO. 11-06 - A RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT PERMIT PROJECT P30478; NUGGET WAY INTERSECTION AND NEWMAN STREET RAILROAD CROSSING. ' b. RESOLUTION NO. 11-07 - A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE SPRINGFIELD MAIN STREET (OR 126) SAFETY STUDY. 4. Ordinances 5. Other Routine Matters a. Approval of the Liquor License Endorsements for Aquila & Priscilla's Eatery and Coffee Bar, Located at 1843 Pioneer Parkway East, Springfield, Oregon. b. Approval of the Liquor License Endorsement for 3 Of A Kind Deli, Located at 5768 Main Street, Springfield, Oregon. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 7, 2011 Page 2 IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WITH THE COUNCIL MINUTES. AS AMENDED BY CORRECTING THE SECOND ON THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT MOTION ON FEBRUARY 7, 2011 TO COUNCILOR WOODROW, AND CORRECTING THE LOCATION OF THE FEBRUARY 22, 2011 REGULAR MEETING TO THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE MOTION PASSED BY A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. ITEMS REMOVED PUBLIC HEARINGS -Please limit comments to 3 minutes. Request to speak cards are available at both entrances. Please present cards to City Recorder. Speakers may not yield their time to others. 1. 2012-2016 Capital Improvement Program, A Community Reinvestment Plan. Civil Engineer Jeff Paschall presented the staff report on this item. The City of Springfield 2012- 2016Capital Improvement Program, A Community Reinvestment Plan, had been drafted by staff, reviewed by the Planning Commission (February 1, 2011), and the City Council in work session (February 14, 2011). During their February 1 meeting, the Commission recommended Council approval of the plan. During their February 14 Work Session, Council provided direction to bring the CIP as drafted to the March 7, 2011 Council regular session for public hearing and approval. The only change to the final CIP from the version Council reviewed. at the February 14, 2011 work session was a correction to the Mill Race Restoration Project Improvement SDC Eligibility amount (Attachment 2, Page 36 of the agenda packet) from 100% to 12.7%. This change had no effect on the current Mill Race project accounting or fmancing. As a reference, the Council Briefing Memorandum from the February 14, 2011 work session was included as Attachment 2 of the agenda packet. After hearing public comments, Council was requested to adopt the 2012 - 2016 Capital Improvement Program by motion. Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing. 1. Christine Shirley, State of Oregon, Land Conservation and Development (DECD), Natural Hazards and Planning ram. Ms. Shirley spoke in support of Project SCS Channel 6 FIRM Update in the CIP. This project was of great importance to DECD, FEMA, and the residents in that area. There was an item in the project to do some planning to determine what needed to be modeled in the area as there had been some change in the area that had perhaps caused the flood zones to be smaller or larger. Several construction projects had contributed to this change. FEMA regulations required that the City notify FEMA when flood zones changed within 6 months after project completion. These projects had been completed for many ~- years and it was time to get the map fixed in this area. Springfield's continued participation in the National Flood Insurance Program depended in part in following through with this study and the subsequent modeling. DECD monitored . all Oregon communities for compliance with the National Flood Insurance City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes ' March 7, 2011 Page 3 Program and would be watching this project to ensure it occurred in a timely fashion. Ms. Shirley was available for questions. Mayor Lundberg closed the,public hearing. IT WAS MOVED~BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO ADOPT THE 2012-2016 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, A COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT PLAN. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. 2. Springfield Animal Control Ordinance Revision. ORDINANCE NO. 1 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD AMENDING SECTION 5.416 "PIGS" AND SECTION 5.426 "LICENSES. FEES AND EXCEPTIONS" OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICH'AL CODE TO PERMIT POT BELLIED PIGS. Police Chief Jerry Smith presented the staff report on this item. The Springfield Municipal Code provided that no pigs shall be permitted inside city limits. At the request of several citizens the attached ordinance would allow the keeping of pot bellied pigs in Springfield. The proposed ordinance was reviewed at the January 18, 2011 Work Session. The. first reading and public hearing was held on Feb 7, 2011: Last September Springfield citizen Sarah Snapp submitted information in support of permitting pot bellied pigs as pets inside Springfield city limits. Following meetings with Ms. Snapp, the attached ordinance was drafted by City Attorney Joe Leahy. The ordinance would permit the keeping of such animals recognizing that they were "clean, intelligent and affectionate animals, and when properly cared for are desirable to some persons as household pets." The proposed ordinance required the owner of a pot bellied pig to obtain a City license for the pet; the license would require a veterinarian's certification that the animal had been spayed or neutered. The proposed ordinance specified weight and height limitations and required pot bellied pigs to be kept on a leash if taken off the owners' property. In response to questions raised during the public hearing, a provision had been added requiring the pig owner to identify an individual or. veterinarian .(including address and telephone number) residing within 20 miles of Springfield who had~agreed to retrieve and secure the pig if it was found to be at large and the owner was unavailable. The information would be required at the time of licensing. The ordinance made the pig owner responsible for any cost incurred by the City for capturing an "at large" animal as well as for any housing and feeding cost. In addition, the ordinance would allow only one, pot bellied pig per residence. The City's Animal Control Officer would be responsible for enforcement of the ordinance and issuing of licenses. Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing. 1. Fred Simmons, 312 South 52nd Place, Springfield, OR. Mr. Simmons said the changes in the ordinance made it better regarding responsibility of the owner, but he didn't feel it was the current applicants that would be the issue. There needed to City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 7, 2011 Page 4 be some mechanism in the future for neighbors to be able to deal with problems that could occur. There needed to be a process to address this issue. He asked that they consider a component now or in the future making the conditional use of the license appealable by the neighbors. 2. Curtiss Greer, 357 55~' Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Greer felt the wording needed to be changed regarding pigs at-large. He didn't~agree with the license fee being the .same as for dogs, because the current control truck wasn't capable of handling any animal besides a dog. He asked how enforcement could identify if a pig was foreign or domestic. The wording needed to be changed to just reference pot- bellied pigs. He was concerned about pigs getting out and causing damage to someone's yard and if there was recourse. He felt the changes were putting a burden on the taxpayers. Sarah Wood-Snag; 2328 Don Street, Springfield, OR. Ms. Snapp thanked the Mayor and Council for taking the time to hear their testimony, as this was an important topic for her and others. Apot-bellied pig was a pet and required responsible pet ownership, but so did a dog or cat. Often, dogs were far more destructive and more of a nuisance than pigs. Pigs didn't bark or dig in the yard, and were very smart animals. She provided examples of how well trained pigs could be. The ordinance did have the requirement in the ordinance,regarding size and being spayed or neutered. She felt the ordinance was fair and she hoped the Council would allow pot=bellied pigs. 4. DeAnn Urmson, 629 West Fairview Dr., Springfield, OR. Ms. Urmson said she ran a home certified daycare. They had been investigating pot-bellied pigs for a couple of years and had learned that pot-bellied pigs were one of the best pets for a daycare: She had the house inspected and was ready to adopt apot-bellied pig if the ordinance were to pass.. She hoped it passed for the kids' sake. 5. Lizzy Utterback, 772 Jay Street, Sprin~f eld, OR. Ms. Utterback referred to the original letter she submitted during the September Council meeting. In that letter, she had stated that pigs, compared to dogs, were less of a nuisance. The Oregon .. Deparhnent of Agriculture noted fundamental differences between pet pot-bellied pigs and other pigs used as livestock. Pot-bellied pigs were visual learners and often copied their owners in behaviors. Passing this ordinance would also strengthen the economy with money going to veterinarians for vaccinations, spaying and neutering, and placing microchips. There would also be the purchase of toys, food and doggie doors. Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing. Councilor Van Gordon said he felt Fred Simmons' comments were thought provoking. The ordinance was better than the first reading, but there were still some issues. He was concerned that the pigs were being treated like an exception. Other pets could be taken to any veterinarian, but the licensing under this ordinance required that a particular veterinarian signed off before the license was issued. He was concerned about a possible change in the veterinarian's practice in that they would no longer take pigs. He asked if that was a concern for Police. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 7, 2011 Page 5 Chief Smith said it wasn't a concern because it was ;incumbent on the owner of the. pig to find a veterinarian that would spay, neuter; and microchip the pig before a license could be issued. Councilor VanGordon confirmed that at the time of renewal for the license, the owner would need to have a current veterinarian sign off. Yes. He said he was comfortable with that, but still felt the issue brought up by Mr. Simmons needed to be addressed. He appreciated those that had testified and felt with the questions answered, he could be supportive. Councilor Ralston said he had no concerns about this ordinance. They couldn't address every scenario that might come up. He felt the pot-bellied pig was a good option for a pet. Councilor Moore said she was surprised how many of her constituents m Ward 3 called her m opposition of this ordinance. More information was needed to be put out to the public about pot- bellied pigs. She knew that dogs were required to be licensed, but she wondered what percentage of dogs in the City were actually licensed. Chief Smith said it was difficult to say, but he would guess it was much less than half. Councilor Moore asked how they would know if pigs were licensed in the City. Chief Smith said they could track the licenses only. All animal calls were driven by complaints. The license benefit was to get the animal back to the owner. Licensing did not help control the dog problem. Councilor- Woodrow thanked Mr. Simmons for his comments and agreed that they needed to look into future recourse for people in the community. She was not against an ordinance, but felt there were still some areas that needed addressed. One of the issues was to look at some situations that could arise from the public who were neighbors to the pig owners. Those speaking had shown responsibility and respect for the animal. They needed to make consideration of those that might not be as responsible. There needed to be information and education to the public about the role of pot-bellied pigs as pets. She didn't want to put an ordinance in place to approve pot-bellied pigs as pets, and then fmd that it needed to be repealed due to issues that arose because processes weren't in place. She wanted to address the issues on the front end. Councilor Pishioneri said there was still some interpretation of this ordinance. If the City was in the position of enforcement, the City needed veterinarians that would represent the City, rather than just the owner. The City didn't have an agreement with Lane County Animal Regulation Authority (LCARA) regarding handling of pigs, so there was no place the City could take a pig in need of care. The City had a responsibility to care for the animals when .found, and he still hadn't seen that addressed. He was not comfortable making a motion to adopt the ordinance, but suggested they set this aside for a third reading once the issues had been addressed. Councilor Wylie said she was willing to go ahead or to wait. Councilor VanGordon asked Chief Smith if he had everything they needed.to deal with any issues that would arise from this ordinance, such as equipment. Chief Smith said the Police could handle anything. Animal Control had the capability to handle a pot-bellied pig that was within the weight limit of 95 pounds. If it was much more over that City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 7, 2011 Page 6 weight, they didn't have the capability, and had to rely on LCARA who charged the City a large amount. Within the statute, the Police Department would find a way. Councilor Pishioneri asked City Attorney Joe Leahy about Council's options. ,\ Mr. Leahy said they could move to lay it on table until staff brought back information to address their concerns. They could delay it to a date certain or until staff got the information. If Council ,felt they could support it with further revisions, staff would do what they could to address those issues. On the other hand, if Council felt they would not have enough votes to pass the ordinance even with further revisions, he asked that Council, let them know. It may also be that Council wasn't sure if the revisions would be adequate, in which case staff would bring back the information for further review. Councilor Pishioneri noted that the dog ordinance had been in place for many years and Council had been able to make revisions through the years. He wanted to make sure they drafted this ordinance so it would be right for the future. Councilor Ralston said he was willing to put it on the table, but he wanted to make sure all of . their questions were answered. He hadn't seen anything that would stop him from supporting this ordinance. It was not the Council's job to educate people about pot-bellied pigs as pets. It was Council's job to look at the facts and make the decision on those facts. He was fine looking at further revisions, but was ready to support it now. . ~- Mayor Lundberg said Council was not unsupportive, but was not ready right now. She asked if staff understood the concerns or if they .needed the Council to email those to them. Mr. Leahy said one concern he had noted was responsibilities to the neighbors. That could be addressed with a complaint procedure. The ordinance was written strictly for pot-bellied pigs and was initially drafted to address the idea of allowing pot-bellied pigs, and if problems developed, those could be addressed later. He was sensing that Council wanted a more expansive ordinance, which was their prerogative. Council could send him an email with their concerns that he and staff could respond to and bring back to Council. Councilor Ralston said he heard that there needed to be recourse if a pig got out and caused damage. The second issue he heard -was what the Police would then do with the pig. Mr. Leahy said the second issue was already addressed. Councilor Pishioneri wanted an agreement with local veterinarians and the City to handle pigs found at-large with no license. Mr. Leahy said they may not' be able to address that concern. Mayor Lundberg said other communities had an ordinance allowing pot-bellied pigs. Mr. Leahy said that was correct. The one before Council was far more complete than the others. Mayor Lundberg asked staff to contact those cities to get anecdotal information and suggestions of what could be included in the ordinance to address issues. they had experienced. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 7, 2011 Page 7 Councilor Ralston said there were three veterinarian offices locally that took pot-bellied pigs: Santa Clara Animal Hospital, Four Hooves in Creswell, and South Willamette Vet in Creswell. Mr. Leahy said Councilor Pishioneri wanted some kind of assurance from one or more of those veterinarians that they would be available to take pigs. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO TABLE ORDINANCE NO. 1 UNTIL MORE INFORMATION IS RECEIVED BY STAFF. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 ~ r AGAINST. Mr. Leahy said if councilors had further questions later in the week, they could email staff and they would try to address all of them. ~ _ BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE COUNCII, RESPONSE CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS BIDS ORDINANCES 1. Library -Municipal Code Amendments. ORDINANCE N0.2 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2.452-2.474 OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICII'AL CODE PROVIDING REGULATIONS FOR THE CITY LIBRARY BOARD (FIRST READING Library Director Rob Everett presented. the staff report on this item. The current number of five board members had made it increasingly difficult to achieve a quorum at its monthly meetings. ' Expanding the Library Board to 7 members would help to alleviate this problem. Another change would be for the board members to be referred to as "board".members, not "trustees." A 7 member Library Board would better reflect both the size and demographic profile of the community and help expand community participation. Antiquated and inaccurate wording would be,removed from the City Code to reflect the actual operation of the library with. regard to collecting fines, promulgating rules, preparing the budget, donations and biennial reports to the Council. Councilor Pishioneri asked if the antiquated and inaccurate wording was included in the ordinance before them. Mr. Everett said it was included in this ordinance. He explained the language changes. NO ACTION REQUESTED. FIRST READING ONLY. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 7, 2011 Page 8 ~ . BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL 1. Committee Appointments a. Arts Commission Appointment. Librarian and Arts Commission Staff Liaison Carrie Schindele-Cupples presented the staff report on this item. The Arts Commission .had five vacancies on its board. Five position openings were advertised for three resignations of members Michelle Lian, Marilee Woodrow and Sandra Dominguez, and two term expirations of commissioners Niles Schartz and Scott Wylie, who are eligible to reapply. The Arts Commission received four applications. Applicants Sally LaMarche, Niles Schartz, Riley Smith and Scott Wylie attended the February Arts Commission meeting and for an interview.. . The Arts Commission believed all applicants were eligible and qualified to serve on the commission. They recommended that Niles Schartz and Scott Wylie be re-appointed to terms ending December 31, 2014, Sally LaMarche be appointed to fill a term ending December 31, 2013, and Riley Smith be appointed to fill a term expiring on December 31, 2011. Councilor Wylie recused herself from the first motion as her husband was up for re- appointment. ' IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPOINT NILES SCHWARTZ AND SCOTT WYLIE TO THE ARTS .COMMISSION WITH TERMS EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 2014. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSTENTION -WYLIE). IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPOINT RILEY SMITH TO THE ARTS ,\ COMIVIISSION WITH A TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 2011. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPOINT SALLY LAMARCHE TO THE ARTS COMNIISSION WITH A TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 2013. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. 1. Business from Council a. Committee Reports 1. Councilor VanGordon reported on the Lane Metro Partnership meeting. Discussion was held regarding positioning our citizens, work force, and communities as we came out of the recession, and how we could take advantage of new opportunities. It was interesting to see how dedicated everyone was to see that Lane County came out of . the recession as strong as possible. Councilor VanGordon reported on the LCOG Economic Committee. During the meeting, there were two presenters. The first was on Micro Financing, from E-Dev City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 7, 2011 Page 9 out of Lane Community College. E-Dev served about 500 people with six different courses. Eighty percent of their business came from businesses that had 1-5 employees who were trying to get to the next level. E-Dev coached these businesses in how to build their business and add jobs. That started a discussion about small businesses in the community and where they could go to get help. He hoped LCOG could clarify roles and responsibilities so businesses knew where to go. The second ,\ .presenter was the City Administrator from Veneta. Veneta was busy and ready to grow, and their investment and ability to drive business to Veneta for tourism would help Springfield. ~ 2. Councilor Ralston reported on the United Front Trip to Washington D.C. This was the 20`~ year of this trip. They attended seven meetings two day in a row. It was a great trip to learn .about how things were done back there: The environment was ~ dismal so they weren't able to report on funding that was secured at this time. The lobbyists would provide a report regarding what to expect. There could be cuts of up to 62% in CDBG funds which would adversely affect our community. A summary would be provided. 3. ~' Councilor Moore reported on the Lane County Workforce meeting. There was a lot of concern regarding lost revenue. Chuck Forster, the Director, was up for review. He received a very positive review, but they were not in a position to recommend a raise, as many of their staff would be cut. She was going in for an orientation in the next few weeks. The meeting was very interesting and she was impressed with the work that had been done. BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ADJOI:IRNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:46 p.m. Minutes Recorder Amy ~ Sowa .. Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: City Reco er i