Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/24/2002 Work Session . MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD ON MONDAY, ruNE 24, 2002 The Springfield City Council met in work session at Springfield City Hall, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Jesse Maine Meeting Room, on Monday, June 24, 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 Mike Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Attorney Meg Kieran, City Recorder Kim Krebs, Police Chief Jerry Smith, and members of staff. 1. National Institute of Correction Study: Springfield Municipal Jail ProposaL Captain Rich Harrison was present for the staff report. He said the purpose of this work session was to provide information, and discuss and solicit input from the council regarding issues and concerns related to the proposed National Institute of Correction (NIC) Study. He said the council previously authorized staff to move forward with the study on the feasibility of a municipal jail in Springfield. The study is being conducted this week, and will conclude with a community meeting on, June 27, to be held in the Council Chambers from 6:30 - 9:30 pm. . Captain Harrison introduced Ms. Carol Knapel, a consultant from NIC to provide a briefing on how the study will be conducted, and to solicit input from the council on issues and concerns they may have. Ms. Knapel provided background information on the NIC. There is a specific division within the NIC that is called the "jails division" that has many types of documentation and provides technical assistance. She said she is a consultant for NIC, and has worked in the criminal justice system for 22 years. Her expertise is in planning and working with designers to get a facility up and operating. The program she is working on is called the Planning of New Institutions (PONI). This is a 3 day intensive study, including interviews with the community, staff and the councilor elected officials. She said that Springfield is somewhat unique in that they are looking at the feasibility of building a new municipal jail, and not changing or modifying an existing facility. She said she has primarily worked with jurisdictions in redevelopment or changes in existing facilities. Ms. Knapel said she is anxious to hear from the council as to what their concerns are, what the issues are and where she should look or focus her efforts. Mayor Leiken thanked Ms. Knapel for being here, and asked a question related to the recent facility that Santa Clara County, California built. . Ms. Knapel responded to the Mayor's question. She also said many cities are deciding to build their own facility because the county jails are not able to accommodate their needs. She provided a brief description ofthe actions taken to develop the facility. Mayor Leiken asked how many beds are in the Lane County JaiL Springfield City Council Work Session Minutes - June 24,2002 Page - 2 . Captain Harrison confirmed that the Lane County Jail currently has approximately 500 beds. Chi ef Smith said to keep in mind that some of those beds are leased or rented out to the State and the Federal Government for housing their prisoners. He said he has not been able to obtain a fIrm number of beds that are really available to the local community from the jail and hopes that in the study Ms. Knapel will be able to ascertain that information. Councilor Fitch said she would like to see if there are any other options that would be available other than building a new facility. She hopes to also see operating expenses, staffing costs, and if the initial projection of 50 beds would be a sufficient number to assist in alleviating the current or existing problem in this community. Ms. Knapel said yes she is evaluating other issues beside the jail facility. There may be options for programs to hold people accountable, because the real issue is that of accountability and over- capacity at the current Lane County jail. She said operating costs might be difficult, because that will ultimately depend on many things such as: size of the facility; whether to limit to just male or include male/female; services such as medical in the facility. Those will all affect the ultimate costs. The size of the facility depends on what the community wants and needs. Discussion was held regarding the number of prisoners transported per day from Springfield to the Lane County Jail and how many prisoners are matrixed per day. . Councilor Ralston asked how long of a stay would be needed to take care of the crimes committed? Chief Smith and Captain Harrison said what is needed is a facility that is capable of holding a prisoner until bail is posted, and/or the prisoner has been sentenced. If a prisoner is sentenced to 30 days in jail that prisoner needs to stay for the 30 days, nothing less. Captain Harrison talked about victims of certain types of crimes, and how. frustrating it is for them if they see that a defendant is sentenced for the crime, and is released only hours or days after sentencing. Discussion was held regarding the Federal Courthouse and the uses of their beds, and Junction City's use of the Lane County Courthouse. City Attorney Meg Kieran responded to a legal question related to why the Lane County Jail is required to house state and federal prisoners. Discussion was held regarding utilizing county facilities versus building a city facility. Councilor Simmons said there are a number of issues to look at. 1) the revolving door issue, 2) the northwest average of cost for construction and operating; 3) the capacity needs; 4) the possibility of a temporary fIx; 5) other alternatives that could be used to meet the needs for control and containment; 6) charging prisoners for their jail time; 7) effectively using prisoners in the local work program that would offset the cost for housing. . There was discussion related to SpringfIeld's property crime average which is now twice as much as the state average. Springfield City Council Work Session Minutes - June 24, 2002 Page - 3 . Ms. Knapel said the answers to many of these questions would be addressed in the community meeting on June 27th. Those will include some ofthe legal issues and tradeoffs. Councilor Lundberg said she has dug her heals in all along when discussing the need for a new jail. She said she wants to be as optimistic as possible. She said there has been ongoing discussion regarding the use ofthe Pods at the Juvenile Justice Center, and wanted to make sure Ms. Knapel was aware of that. She said another issue being discussed is a combined public safety facility, and wanted to make sure that option is explored to determine whether or not it is feasible. She would like to know if other jurisdictions have done the same and what the successes of those types of facilities have been. She would also like to explore the option of a private developer building a facility and the city leasing it out. There was discussion regarding the operation of a medical facility within the jail, versus contracting with the county for prisoners who have or need special medical attention. It might be important to determine the special needs of a prisoner prior to housing them in order to determine which facility would meet the needs of the prisoner. If we had our own municipal jail, who would fund the special medical needs of some of the prisoners? Councilor Fitch said she would also like to see statistics that reflect the before and after effects. What was the crime rate before the facility was built, and what was the crime rate after? Have positive results been reported? . Ms. Knapel mentioned that generally the rules that apply to a county facility are different then those applied to a municipal facility. The county is required to have a jail, the city is not. She said ifthe city were to build a facility it would be complimentary. That issue would be further discussed at the June 27 meeting. Councilor Simmons discussed the Lane County jail and the requirements placed on them by the Federal Courthouse. Councilor Ballew asked if Lane County had ever contacted NIC for evaluation of their facility. Ms. Knapel said no, Lane County had not. Councilor Hatfield said an alternative sanction center might be an option, which might include drug testing onsite, electronic surveillance, and other alternative types of sentences. Ms. Knapel said that an alternative sanction center would be evaluated. Councilor Lundberg asked if there was any potential for the use of the current holding cells at the Springfield Police Building. Ms. Knapel said she would look into that possibility also, but felt it would be difficult to manage. Mayor Leiken asked where the terminology "beds" came from. . Ms. Knapel said it started being used as a common term. It used to be "cells ", and then it became a substitution for the word cells. A cell can house 1-20 people, so the word bed began to be used to identify the number of inmates. Springfield City Council Work Session Minutes - June 24, 2002 Page - 4 . Mayor Leiken thanked Ms. Knapel for meeting with the council, and said he is anxious to see the results ofthe study, and looked forward to the public meeting on June 27. 2. Proposed Springfield Development Code Amendments. Planner III Gary Karp, Planning Supervisor Mel Oberst, City Attorney Meg Kieran, and Civil Engineer Ken V ogeney were present for the staff report on this issue. Mr. Oberst provided a quick overview regarding the proposed code amendments. Testimony at the Planning Commission public hearing alerted staff to a couple of issues. Staff revised language to make it clearer that this met "Clean Water Act" requirements. At the June 4th Planning Commission public hearing, staff presented the proposed revisions to both the staff report and the proposed Springfield Development Code text. The Planning Commission directed staff to ensure compliance with the public process by requesting additional newspaper notice and written notice to all persons who submitted oral and/or written testimony on April 2. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing until June 18th but no one came forward to speak in support or opposition. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward to the City Council. Ms. Kieran said that staff did refocus the changes in light of the public comments regarding Goal 6. She highlighted the wording of Goal 6. Under all defInitions, one thing that is consistent is temperature as a pollutant. What these code amendments address is the least expensive way for us to take steps to comply with Goal 6. Each of the statewide planning goals has guidelines that provide actions that municipal jurisdictions can use to remain in compliance: . Ms. Kieran said Goal 5, as amended in 1996, requires local government to "adopt programs that will protect natural resources and conserve scenic, historic, and open space resources for present andfuture generations." The City is currently engaged in completing its Goal 5 work program as part of its Periodic Review process and to address new Goal 5 requirements implementing the amended Goal 5 administrative regulations. Ms. Kieran said staff does acknowledge that these amendments affect Goal 5 resource sites. She said the Goal 5 sites that we have identified are pre-1996 resource sites, but they have provided findings and put materials in the record showing compliance with Goal 5. That is not to be confused with the city of Springfield Goal 5 work program mandated by the 1996 amendments to Goal 5. Those two need to be kept separate. To the extent that the code amendments implement state and federal water quality standards, the measures in the decision are required by Goal 6 and the otherwise applicable steps in Goal 5 process do no apply. We are looking at 3 water quality parameters: 1) temperature, 2) nutrients, and 3) sedimentation. The thrust of what we are doing is to adopt measures when applicable state or federal standards will be violated by pollution. Ms. Kieran highlighted her discussions with the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). She talked about setbacks. The city of Springfield in March 2003 is required to apply for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Prior to that time, and hopefully by December of this year, the DEQ will determine whether the city must get a general ~ permit or an individual permit. DEQ is also looking at the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers to determine the city's allocation for pollutants. At the time we apply for the NPDES, the city would like to show the DEQ that we are using good management practices. . Ms. Kieran said if we do nothing the risk is two fold: 1) citizen lawsuit, 2) DEQ could impose penalties and sanctions, although they don't normally do that as long as the city can show good faith efforts, and these amendments show we are working to resolve the issue. We either do Springfield City Council Work Session Miriutes - June 24, 2002 Page - 5 . something now, or later. What staff is proposing now is the least expensive for the city. Given the momentum of the staff, and bringing the changes to council, we are a little ahead of the curve. In her opinion, we are right where we should be. Councilor Fitch asked if we are responsible from our boundaries from both rivers, as it comes into our territory, or are we responsible for all of our neighbors for the entire length. DEQ is putting the rules together for temperature. They are currently regulating Springfield where our system ends, not making it a direct conneCtion to what's occurring other than whether or not the river meets water quality standards. The state's temperature standard is 64 degrees. Mr. V ogeney provided copies of a memorandum to the Springfield Planning Commission from staff regarding the Removal of Irving Slough and Pierce Channel from the Water Quality Limited Watercourses Map. The proposal before council is to put protection in place on certain water courses that currently don't meet the water quality standards and direct tributaries to those. Direct tributaries are open waterways that flow directly into DEQ identified waterways. He highlighted the information contained in the memorandum. Councilor Ballew asked ifthe water pipes keep the water cooler. Mr. V ogeney said not necessarily, because the water is moving too quickly and there is not enough contact with the ground. The way the pipes cool the water best is if you can get it into the groundwater. . Exhibit 6 lists the proposed waterways, Irving Slough and Pierce Channel, for the protective setbacks. Councilor Hatfield asked Mr. V ogeney about setbacks for the channel between 69th and nnd Street. Mr. Vogeney circulated a copy ofthe Policy Analysis and Scientific Literature Review, and highlighted the information contained. He talked about the effectiveness of a 50 foot vegetative corridor. Councilor Ralston said he has been contacted by many people regarding the 50 foot set back. Is it possible that could be considered "taking"? Ms. Kieran said in this situation we are not "taking" because the land still has other uses. Mr. Karp circulated a handout titled "Permitted Uses in Riparian Areas". Mr. Oberst and Ms. Kieran talked about issues and any properties that might be unusable after these setbacks are put into place. Councilor Ballew asked how this affects existing uses. . Mr. Karp said existing uses are not affected. He said new or re-developed properties would be affected, and it is possible that commercial expansion would probably be affected by this as well. Springfield City Council Work Session Minutes - June 24, 2002 Page - 6 . Councilor Fitch said in Glenwood there is a lot of commercial development. If they were doing an improvement of growth or expansion would they have to comply with the percentage ofthe Goal that matches the percentage of their improvement? Being close to the river, how would that be handled? Mr. Oberst said if they were going to add parking areas or buildings that do not c~rrently exist, they would have to comply. They would also have to comply with flood plain codes and the Willamette Greenway. Councilor Fitch asked what obligation the Corp of Engineers has to keep the flow at an adequate level to control the temperature. Councilor Simmons discussed these amendments and his feeling that they are inadequate to truly improve the quality of water. He commended the staff for their quality of work, but feels the content needs work. He said that developers have many options for improving water quality. He discussed the high school students and their testing of the ditches next year, and hopes the council would invite them next year to come and show their projects and findings. He feels this amendment is not aggressive enough to meet the standards and he will vote against it. He believes someone could come along and place a building restriction on the city for failing to do the homework that should have been done. Mayor Leiken asked the council if they thought this was enough information to direct staffto proceed with the public hearing. . Councilor Hatfield said he did not have a problem with the public hearing, but does have some concerns about the ditches mentioned in the staff report. He feels that more work needs to be done, and doesn't see the need to rush to adopt the ordinance. He said this does need some public comment. He asked the council if an additional work session was necessary or ifthey could proceed with the public hearing. . Councilor Lundberg discussed the need to make it clear future development is effected, versus existing development. Is this developmental code a small piece of what needs to be done or are there fundamental problems with this code. Councilor Simmons said the fundamental premise of the code is avoidance oflegal problems, not quality of life or environmental issues. He said that sometimes the timidity in some of those areas leads to destruction of systems that could have been saved. He said ifthe code amendments only impact a narrow number of properties, then it is important to give the developers what they can or cannot do. He has concerns regarding the lack of coordination between departments on the issue. He said there has been some coordination, but there needs to be more. There was discussion regarding the need for clarification on Riparian vegetation. Councilor Ballew said there appears to be a sentence missing on page 2-37 (31.030), ofthe handout. . After further discussion, council consensus was to move forward with the public hearing. They would leave the public hearing open to obtain feedback and in order to provide an opportunity to respond to the various questions and concerns. Springfield City Council Work Session Minutes - June 24, 2002 Page - 7 . Mayor Leiken thanked Mr. Karp and additional staff for their efforts on this issue. 3. 10- Year Service Plan. Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi was present for the staff report on this issue. He said there are two work sessions scheduled for discussion and development ofthis plan. He said at this time the task is to set measurements for performance indicators. Fiscal Years 00/01 and 02 are already set in place. Councilor Fitch asked if staff could make assumptions and convert them into dollars. Mr. Grimaldi said yes, that would eventually happen once the performance indicators have all been identified. POLICE Police Chief Smith was present for this report. Customer Satisfaction Councilor Hatfield asked about the achievement level for response times on page 3 items #7 & #8 and how often those percentages are met. . Chief Smith said in #8 regarding non-emergency, 30 minutes to an hour may not be a long time for the situation. For the department, however, this is an indicator that they are backed up and short of staff and not delivering quality service. Councilor Ralston referred to #2 and asked what changed in FY03. Chief Smith stated that this is projection only. Councilor Ballew asked if the average citizen expects improvement, or is the average good enough. Results Chief Smith said on #1 & #2 we are at a lower percentage of clearances in those that are assigned overall. When we compare Springfield with other jurisdictions, the first measurement does not look good unless you know the agency and look at the criteria for assigned basis. The second set of measurements, are all cases reported that are serious crimes. He clarified that #1 and #2 are serious crimes and #3 and #4 capture all crimes. Councilor Lundberg asked in regards to # 10 if staff is relying on a jail facility. Yes. She also asked if we are planning on giving more citations or are people going to break the law more. . Chief Smith said there is an assumption that there would be some growth in staff by 2013, plus traffic in Springfield would increase. In response to Councilor Ballew, he said if council chooses to keep #5, they need to keep in mind that we don't have the 2001 reports and won't have them until October. Those results are on calendar years, and the results are always delay by one year. Springfield City Council Work Session Minutes - June 24,2002 Page - 8 . FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY Chief Murphy was present for this portion. He presented council with materials and told them that these are clustered and thematIC. He discussed criteria fIremen strive for to respond to calls. The outcomes they are looking for are low fire death, fewer fires and zero tolerance for HazMat released within facilities that they have HazMat control over. They need to measure the favorable response to fIre and life safety services. Response times are in the city ordinance and Fire and Life Safety have not been able to meet those standards. He said that in the 10- Year Service Plan, they are asking for the ability to meet those standards. The outcome in lives and properties saved are tied in a deliberate way to these standards. . Council consensus - approve the data as presented. LffiRARY Library Director Bob Russell was present for this report. Mr. Russell said hours, collections and programs were taken from the long range planning document. The favorable rating and percentage of citizens would be affected by the fIrst three. Councilor Fitch asked regarding Pg 8 #3 if that was referring to partnering with other agencies or organizations? Mr. Russell said yes, a little of both, but on the outreach issue we would be partnering. . Councilor Hatfield said this is the fIrst cut, our wish list, and what it will cost in the beginning. We need to look at what kind of costs we are looking at. Is this a straight line cost, halfway, or do costs go up in a stair step fashion? Councilor Lundberg asked if departments have a variety of sources for income identified, and if so she would like a short list of revenue sources, existing versus projecting. She feels we need to identify general revenue sources from property tax on down. After further discussion council consensus was to adjourn the meeting now, and continue the balance ofthis discussion at the July 8 work session meeting of the council. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. , Minutes Recorder - Kim Krebs . A~~ Kim Krebs, City Recorder