HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/22/2003 Work Session
.. 1.
.
.
.
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2003.
The City of Springfield council met in work session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225 Fifth Street,
Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, September 22,2003 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Leiken
presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken and Councilors Woodrow, Burge, Fitch, Ballew, Malloy and
Ralston. Also present were Assistant City Manager Cynthia Pappas, City Attorney Joe Leahy,
City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
1. Historic Commission Interviews.
Planner Kitti Gale gave the staff report on this item. Ms. Gale said the Historic Commission will
have two openings on September 30,2003 in its seven-member commission due to the term
expirations of Michelle Dennis and Donald Moloney. The recruitment for these openings began
August 7, 2003, and closed August 29,2003. Four candidates have applied, including Michelle
Dennis, Chair of the Springfield Historic Commission.
Ms. Gale said the members appointed to the Historic Commission shall be residents, electors, or
property owners within Springfield; appointees of other Springfield public agencies; specialists
with expertise in fields of architecture, history, architectural history, planning or archaeology,
who live within the Metro-area General Plan boundaries.
Ms. Gale introduced Donald McCormaCK and Roxie Metzler, current members of the Historic
Commission.
Council chose the questions they would ask of each applicant, th~n began the interview process.
The council interyiewed Tricia Raines.
The council interviewed Greg Slater.
The council interviewed Scott Wylie.
The council interviewed Michelle Dennis.
Council discussed the four candidates and recommended re-appointment of Michelle Dennis.
Consensus from the council was to re-advertise for the second position for 30 days. If no others
apply, council would choose from the remaining three applicants.
2. Eugene/Springfield Metro Waterways - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers General
Investigation Study - Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement.
Maintenance Manager Ed Black gave the staff report on this item. Mr. Black introduced Eric
Bluhm from the Corps of Engineers and Steve Gordon from Lane Council of Governments
(LCOG). Mr. Black said the City of Eugene, Lane County and City of Springfield staffs have
been working with the Corps to develop the Project Management Plan for the Metro Waterways
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes, September 22,2003
Page 2
.
General Investigation Study. The project plan identifies and assigns roles, and establishes a
schedule and cost estimate for the Feasibility Study. The Corps is programmed to start the
project this fall. The central provisions of an intergovernmental agreement between the local
sponsors and the negotiated cost-sharing agreement will be presented to the council.
In April 2001, Dr. James Johnson, Director of Policy and Planning, Corps, visited
Eugene/Springfield to inspect Corps funded projects in the metropolitan governments take a
more comprehensive, integrated approach to address water resource issues in the urban
watershed. In February 2002, the United Front delegation was successful in gaining federal
support to initiate a Corps study of water resources in the Eugene/Springfield metropolitan area.
Staff reported the results of the Corps' project Reconnaissance Study to the council on
November 25,2002; this report established a federal interest and recommended proceeding to
the next phase - Feasibility. By consensus, the council instructed staff to negotiate a cost
sharing agreement with the Corps for the Feasibility Study, and to report back to council. On
July 21, 2003 staff updated council on the scope of work and cost negotiations with the Corps.
The council requested staff identify sponsorship options and encourage County participation.
The Council Briefing Memorandum included in the agenda packet provides additional
information regarding project scope, cost and sponsorship.
.
Mr. Black said there is a 139 page project management plan which detailed responsibilities and
tasks to complete the feasibility study. He referred to the two tiers of priority projects in the
Eugene/Springfield Metropolitan area. In Springfield the first tier projects included the lower
region of the Mill Race, Cedar Creek and the 42nd Street/Q Street Basin. These projects would
be taken from this study to a point where they would be ready for final design and construction.
The second tier projects included a large array of water resource related projects in Springfield
and the metro area, which would be investigated and brought to the point of preliminary design.
At that time both sets of projects were estimated at $3M. After their detailed study, the cost is
now listed at $6.4M. He said the Corps has two potential scopes to offer. One would be doing
both sets of priorities and the other would be to do just the priority projects. The cost of just the
priority projects would be $3.5M, which is still more than originally identified. The City has
control over what the work plan would look like. The $3.5M project would be the highest
possible cost.
City Attorney Joe Leahy said if council does not agree to go forward, we do not have to go
forward. It is also up to council to determine how much they want to spend each year. He said it
is an annual option. This provides an umbrella if they choose to go forward.
Councilor Fitch asked if staff time was also calculated in those figures.
Mr. Black said it can be any combination of in-kind services and hard dollarS'that council
chooses.
Mr. Bluhm also noted that the City can terminate their involvement in the project with a letter
within 30 days.
Mr. Black noted the long-range CIP and the broad array of projects this would encompass. He
referenced the maps outlining some of the areas for these projects. He referenced the charts
showing the cost requirements over the next five years and how it is split between City of
Springfield, the City of Eugene and the Federal Government. These are year-by-year
commitments.
.
Assistant City Manager Cynthia Pappas said the chart shows some scenarios and it could change
in coming years.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes, September 22,2003
Page 3
.
Mr. Black referred to the tables in Appendix B (Attachment A, page 8 of 15) from the council
briefing memo showing where the fund would be coming from and the matching funds. He
noted the projects already ongoing.
Discussion was held regarding the County not participating and the efforts made by city staff to
get them on board.
Mr. Leahy said it is important to decide ifthis is a good decision. Council needs to then decide
whether or not to allow the County to be involved and to what degree.
Mr. Black said as sponsors, the County has been involved in this process. He described some of
the advantages of having the County involved even if they are not involved in the funding. He
feels we need to establish a better understanding, with the County, about the interaction of urban
water and rural water. With the County at the table during these discussions, they can establish
that. It will also help to foster a better relationship with the County at the staff level. The
County has information that will be valuable to the project.
Councilor Fitch said the County is having discussions with the City of Eugene regarding a
contract to assist the County with some of the responsibilities.
.
Environmental Services Manager Susie Smith said that the County is under the same
requirements that the City of Springfield is regarding phase II of the NCES stormwater permits
requirements. The County sent a letter to DEQ which has been acknowledged by DEQ. The
County's commitment to work with Eugene and Springfield for us to provide services for them
has started with Eugene because they have had their permit in place for 10 years and their
programs are already fully developed. The County acknowledges that money will be involved.
Mr. Leahy said council can choose to pay only what they want to pay for, our own projects, not
any County projects. He said the County may eventually choose to join in financially.
Mr. Bluhm said the Corps has money allocated for this project.
Mr. Black discussed the County and the funding source they will need to find in the future to pay
Eugene and Springfield for these types of services.
Councilor Ballew asked if the matching could go over the life of the project.
Mr. Black said the total over the 5 year period is $875,000 but there is a lot of flexibility.
Councilor Ballew said she does have a concern that the County is not involved financially.
Mr. Leahy said unless they contribute financially, they have no vote in decisions made.
.
Ms. Smith discussed how they intend to match our funding with the Corps. She said it directly
correlates with the schedule of ongoing> projects that we have now related to our Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) for flood plain studies, our stormwater facility plans and our
stormwater permitting. She said staff has identified these as the high priority needs within the
scope that has already been decided to be done. Matching funds are funds that we would have
spent on the high priority projects either way. It is staff's objective to minimize any additional
costs to the city and to achieve our objectives. These are just the feasibility studies, not any
construction.
Mr. Black confirmed that any construction would need council approval before starting.
,.
.
.
.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes, September 22,2003
Page 4
Discussion was held regarding what could be used as a match, such as land.
Councilor Burge said the $6.4M Feasibility Study does not guarantee any construction. He
asked if this was a good way to spend this money.
Mr. Black said this is a step that must be done before any project. The product that will be
produced will be the design and construction. These are projects that we have planned to do
anyway. He said we have adequate staff for this part of the proj ect at this time. He referred to
Option 2 on Appendix B. He said we do have funds in the CIP and in the budget for
participation.
Councilor Ballew asked if many of these are federal mandates and this is one way to receive
federal money to assist in these projects. Ms. Smith confIrmed that is true.
Mr. Black referred to the resolution that will be brought before council at their regular meeting
tonight which they have the opportunity to accept or reject regarding the intergovernmental
agreement. The IGA between Eugene, Springfield and Lane County is still in progress. It notes
that money spent in Springfield is for Springfield projects.
Councilor Burge asked if the City of Eugene has already taken action on this IGA.
Mr. Black said they accepted a resolution regarding the IGA back in December 2002.
Mr. Leahy referred to the IGA and the responsibility of the County. He said any changes in their
rights or responsibilities would have to be approved by council. Each local government has
control over their own funding.
Mr. Black said staff is recommending that the City has a three way partnership with the Federal
Government and Lane County. He said they also recommend that they enter into a feasibility
cost sharing agreement for $3.5M with the understanding that annually staff works with them on
scope of work and council can determine annual funding.
Mr. Leahy said it appears to be a good agreement with the Corps of Engineers.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:15 pm.
Minutes Recorder - Amy Sowa
Attest:
~~
Amy Sowa
City Recorder