Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/28/2002 Work Session City of Springfield Wdrk S~ion Meeting . MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD TUESDAY, MAY 28,2002 The city of Springfield council met in work session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, May 28,2002, at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Leiken, Councilors Ballew, Fitch, Hatfield, Lundberg, Ralston and Simmons. Also present were City Manager Michael Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Joe Leahy, Administrative Coordinator' Julie Wilson and members of the staff. 1. Review of Peace Health Annexation Agreement. City Planner Colin Stephens presented the staff report on this issue. The council was presented with the final annexation agreement between the city and Peace Health for annexation of approximately 60 acres of Peace Health's property in the Gateway Riverbend area. Upon council approval, the agreement will be forwarded to the Boundary Commission with an affirmative recommendation for approval of the annexation. . On April 29, the council held a public hearing on the annexation of approximately 60 acres of property owned by Peach Health in the Gateway area. The public hearing was continued until May 6th so the council and members of the public could review the draft annexation agreement prior to the council's decision on the matter. At the May 6th hearing, the council received testimony from staff regarding several in-complete portions of the agreement relating to the timing of payments for off-site traffic improvements and provisions for termination of the agreement. At the close of the hearing the council voted in favor of the resolution initiating annexation with the understanding that the final annexation agreement would be brought back to the council at a work session for approval prior to the June 6th Boundary Commission public hearing. The annexation agreement contains language that satisfies these unresolved issues and is agreed to, in its entirety, by both staff and Peace Health. Mr. Stephens reviewed the minor changes to the proposed agreement. He referenced revised language in section 1.5(a) and 1.5(b), pages 4, 5 and 6 of the agenda item summary packet. This revision was revised to tie the payments for the off site transportation contributions to specific triggers. It was also revised to clarify how the funding would be allocated to each of the individual projects earlier identified. Mr. Stephens also reviewed changes made to pages 10 and 11, section 4 and 5. Mr. Stephens said he would like to insert language into section 1-13, agenda item summary/attachment page 9. He had eliminated some redundant language, although, at the City Attorney's direction, this language was intended to be included. The sentence will read as follows, once revised: [Note: the underlined text is the language that will be added to the sentence.) 1.13 Develop on-site and off-site storm water... ...Subject to a demonstrated public purpose, the city of Springfield will facilitate procurement of easements for such off-site facilities if they are in fact necessary ...for demonstrated public process. . Mr. Stephens answered questions from council. O~uncil VI ork Session Minutes May 28, 2002 Page 2 . Councilor Lundberg discussed the construction of the Gateway / Be1t1ine intersection and "date specific" issues. She said a lot of the conversations revolve around timing and when things actually happen. She wanted clarity regarding "date specific." She wondered if it reflected that we initiate a conversation no later than July 1, 2009. Nick Amis answered questions regarding this issue in detail. He said it will be difficult to know how much of the Gateway Beltline we want to improve until Peace Health is up and running, as well as Pacific Source, and other businesses located in the area. Mr. Amis further discussed this issue in detail. Councilor Lundberg said an EA process is so certain things occur, in a certain way, within a time frame. Councilor Lundberg asked if the EA should reflect this schedule. Mr. Stephens answered questions regarding right of way purchases. Councilor Simmons asked questions regarding the agenda item sUlllIDary, attachment 1-7, section 1.5(f). He discussed public money, minimum wage issues, and holding harmless issues. Councilor Simmons discussed page 1-32 of the traffic study, included in the agenda item summary packet. He referenced the closure of Wayside Loop/Hayden Bridge and said where and how the routing will be, was not clear. Mr. Stephens noted that this would be included as a component of the master plan. City Attorney Joe Leahy provided clarification regarding the agenda item summary, section 1.13. He said it is different than what Mr. Stephens read. He said it is the same language that is in 1.2 and 1.3. It will read as follows: 1.13 Develop on-site and off-site storm water... ...Subject to a demonstrated public purpose, the city of Springfield , will facilitate procurement of easements for such off-site facilities if the city finds it is in fact necessary for demonstrated public pumose. . City Attorney Joe Leahy said they inserted the language to make it clear that in both 1.2 and 1.3, with respect to roads and in 1.13, to make sure it is there with respect to storm water, that it is the city making the findings. Council approved the information as presented, with revisions noted. The information will be delivered to Lane County Boundary Commission tomorrow, in preparation for the June 6 meeting. 2. Fire District Evaluation. Fire Chief Dennis Murphy presented the staff report on this issue. Council reviewed new information on fire district operation. According to a consultant report received by council on May 6, the creation of a fire district to serve Springfield and surrounding areas is feasible. The next step is to determine if there is sufficient added benefit to a fire district when compared to a city operated fire department, to pursue further development. Council Goals for 2002-07 include a one-year target to obtain council direction regarding the option of implementing a fire district, if it is determined to be beneficial. At the May 6 council work session, a consultant's feasibility report was received and staff was directed to answer specific questions and prepare additional information for further consideration by council. The agenda item summary packet contained an outline of material to be covered this evening. Depending on council interest and direction, additional detailed information will be provided in subsequent documents. . CQuncil Vi ork Session Minutes May 28, 2002 Page 3 . Chief Murphy introduced audience member Steve Cornacchia, representative for Willakenzie Fire District. He explained that the Willakenzie Fire District supports this proposal, with support of Springfield. He also recognized Senator Bill Morrisette and Deputy Chief Randy Groves, Eugene Fire and Life SafetyDepartment. Chief Murphy provided a power point presentation and reviewed/answered questions regarding the following points: . Why consider a fire district? · Fund current Fire and Life Safety needs at a basic level · Staffing levels across the city · Apparatus and equipment reserve needs · Fire station construction dates and estimate for repairs · Fire trainirig facility needs · Fund ten year service needs · Future station needs · Police, Court, Fire Administration needs · Adequate services to new developments (e.g., Peace Health/River Bend Gateway site) · Why could a fire district provide more reliable funding (provide adequate funding for current and long term needs) , · Why might a fire district be approved (past & current trends support fire service as a top priority) · State and county trends. · Financial considerations (state and county trends supporting fire district model) · Financial considerations (assets) · Liabilities · Annual operations · Current contracts for service · Internal service impacts · What are the most viable fire district models (most viable fire district model) · What are the next steps if council decides to proceed (recommended follow-up steps) In response to a question from Councilor Ballew regarding the service area, Chief Murphy answered questions regarding Ambulance Service Area (ASA). This ASA ensures that rural citizens receive services. He said 26 percent of rural residents are Fire and Life Safety (F&LS) paying customers. Councilor Ballew asked for clarification regarding internal service impacts, purchasing property and maintenance, painting, personnel issues (classification, discipline, and compensation issues), economy of scale, etc. Chief Murphy commented on possible good faith negotiations with existing infrastructure/available internal service. Chief Murphy provided information regarding communities that are served by Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVFR), Aloha, Oregon. He provided additional information regarding comparable information for city population, services level, etc. Councilor Lundberg spoke with other agency councilors regarding the fire district concept. She said it is possible that a fire district could provide an opportunity for better fire protection services. She said she would support this proposal, with the idea that we continue to further study the proposal. She discussed strategic planning issues and noted that F&LS has never been part ofthe Public Safety Coordinating Council (PSCC). She said she was not proposing this but noted the issue related to strategic planning and coordination issues. She said the idea of strategic planning for F&LS, from a broader Lane, County area, should be considered in the future - with or without the creation of a special district. Fire Districts should conduct strategic planning/coordination of efforts. Chief Murphy said his main concern is to provide good fire protection service. . Council Work Session Minutes May 28, 2002 Page 4 . Councilor Ralston said it is not common knowledge, by our citizens, that 28th Street Fire Station is not fully staffed. He said people are not aware ofthis fact. He would like to see the station staffed. Councilor Simmons said as the city grows, we will need a Public Safety Building. He also asked about ISO (insurance) rating issues. He also asked about bond rate/financing rate issues. He said we realize the value of the firefighters in the community. Citizens want service at a fair and economical level, when they call 9-1-1. He said there are many internal effects, and there will be some financial impacts that will be difficult to deal with. Councilor Fitch said this proposal is something we need to look at. She said she would like to volunteer as the council representative for the Oversight Committee. Councilor Ralston volunteered as the alternate representative to the Oversight Committee. Councilor Ballew said a citizen advisory vote should be required for action on the district proposal. Councilor Hatfield said we need to start looking at revenues for the city. He said he would like us to start going through the process to move forward. He referenced the slide presentation, and said he would like the questions noted under "Recommended follow-up steps" answered. He said once we review service levels, performance measures for the city, know where we want to be in 5-10 years, we can then bring the proposal back to council in October. He said this was not a stand-alone issue, there are many parts to this issue. He recommended staff continue to pursue the issues noted under follow-up steps and keep council updated, via written form, regarding negotiations. . After discussion, council suggested they receive an update on follow-up item numbers 1 & 2 by September or shortly after council recess. After additional discussion, Mayor Leiken suggested Councilor Fitch provide council with updates during council meetings, under business from the council, committee updates. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson '\:, .