HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/07/2002 Work Session
.
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2002
The city of Springfield council met in work session in the Jesse Maine Room, 225 Fifth Street,
Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, October 7, at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Leiken, Councilors Ballew, Fitch, Hatfield (via conference call), 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. Animal Control Services.
Police Chief Jerry Smith presented the staff report on this issue. Captain Lewis was also in
attendance. Council is asked to review the methodology of providing animal control services,
if restored. Council is also being asked if the city should reaffIrm elimination of animal .
control services, restore the service or contract for such services.
.
As a result of budget reductions, the Police Department recommended the elimination of
animal control services and the Bu,dget Committee eliminated these services in the FY 03
budget. As anticipated, the city has received numerous complaints as a product of no longer
providing these services, mostly revolving around dogs-at-large and barking dogs. The
Police Department continues to respond to vicious and injured dog complaints as a public
safety issue. :
Staff presented three primary options available:
Option 1 - the City could restore rinimal control services at a net cost of approximately
$72,000.
Chief Smith explained that this is ~ot a complete restoration of animal control services that
previously existed. Previously, the city had one full-time clerk and a part-time animal control
officer. When that was no longer ~vailable, the part time clerk was only performing animal
control duties half-time. The remainder of the time the clerk performed call-taking and police
records services. Restoration of the program, as noted in the AlS briefing memo,
recommends restoration of a full-ttme animal control officer, and requires that person to also
perform record keeping and complaint preparation, previously performed by another person.
The cost of this service would net but at approximately $70,000.
I
Option 2 - The city could contract with Lane County Animal Regulation Authority for
approximately $70,000. This option does not include $2,000-3,000 costs that the Police
Department will experience for veterinarian bills and equipment included in the fIrst option.
.
Chief Smith explained that there is a $30,000 shelter cost that is included in the $70,000 cost
estimate. This would be for an allocated 20 hours per-week. Chief Smith said he spoke with
Work Session Meeting Minutes
October 7, 2002
Page 2
.
the Director of Lane County Animal Regulation Authority, Mike Wellington. Mr.
~ Wellington provided the figure of $66,500, not $70,000 noted in this option. Chief Smith
said in addition to the $66,500 amount, they would also request complete discretion on the
calls that are received, how they respond, and when they respond. Anything outside the 20
hours per week would be charged in addition to the contract. The contract we have now
provides the city the opportunity to call Lane County if there is a problem we are not able to
handle. The city has previously called Lane County for assistance approximately once per
month (e.g., to respond to a vicious dog). Chief Smith noted that the cost estimate for this
option is only an estimatelbaseline figure.
Option 3 - A conclusion could be reached that the fmancial constraints require that the city
not consider re-establishing animal control services. This would not preclude citizens from
filing civil litigation against an offending party.
Chief Smith explained that Option 3 was to leave the program as is, and reaffIrm that animal
control services are no longer a part of our basic serviceslbudget and that the city will not
provide this service.
.
Chief Smith referenced the agenda item summary report, Attachment 1 - Page 2" last
paragraph. "It appears from our initial research that it appears doubtfuL" Chief Smith said
that staffhas conducted additional research on this matter. He said the city could provide
Lane County with consent to execute Lane County ordinances within the city limits. In other
words, Lane County codes would be enforced within the city of Springfield city limits. Chief
Smith again clarified that the city would need to provide Lane County with written consent
related to this issue. Chief Smith said staff did not know if Lane County would be willing to
provide these services or not.
Chief Smith reviewed pros and cons of the various options.
Option 1 -Maintain some level of control over program cost. The disadvantage is that we cut
the program last year due to the fact this is the lowest priority police service, from the city's
perspective.
Option 2 - If the city does outsource animal control services, we would have no control over
the contract cost. We anticipate the service cost will increase. The contract agency would
also want complete control of the program. There will be additional costs that the city will be
liable for, over and above the initial contract amount.
Chief Smith said staff is spending much time trying to resolve animal control
complaints/issues for citizens. Staff is attempting to resolve appropriate complaints without
sending officers out in the field to respond. This method of processing does not always result
in good customer satisfaction. Again, staff is still spending resources dealing with animal
control issues.
If the city does contract with Lane County, we will continue to have citizens contact the city
for assistance when they are not satisfied with Lane County support.
.
Work Session Meeting Minutes
October 7, 2002
Page 3
.
Option 3 - This option reaffirms that the program has been eliminated. This is a step toward
balancing the city budget. The downside of this option is that it does not solve the animal
control problem.
Chief Smith responded to questions from Councilor Ballew. He briefly discussed civil
remedies available to. citizens, through Circuit Court,. Councilor Ballew said our current
situation is unpleasant, although, program elimination/reduction is a step toward addressing
budget constraints.
Chief Smith said Lane County could enforce County Codes, with written consent from the
city of Springfield. Springfield would initially need to take action to eliminate existing city
of Springfield code language to. allow enforcement of the County Code.
City Attorney Joe Leahy discussed Lane County dog control codes/language issues. He said
the city could provide Lane County with consent to enforce County Codes within our city
limits. He said the county could also opt to revise their existing ordinance to limit
implementation / enforcement of their code with specific restrictions (e.g., not applicable to
cities with population of 30,000 or more, etc.). Joe Leahy discussed home rule issues related
to Lane County's code.
Chief Smith and Captain Lewis provided information regarding the number of calls received
during 2000:
. . 277 Barking dogs
. 91 Animal bites
. 91 Vicious dogs
. 121 Injured animals
. 85 Animal abuse
. 381 Dogs at large
. 219 Pound/picked up
. 125 Miscellaneous
Chief Smith explained that if the city restore staffing for animal control services, the
individual would perform animal control functions as well as provide other support to the
Police Department.
City Manager Mike Kelly provided a summary of previous council discussion held regarding
this subject. Mike Kelly said council is being asked to determine if animal control is a basic
service the city will continue to provide, or if we should eliminate the service in order to
balance our General Fund.
Councilor Simmons presented a new Option (4) as follows:
.
1. Repeal our current animal control ordinahce.
2. Provide Lane County with written consent to enforce County regulations within the city
limits of Springfield.
3. Do not contract with the County for pound service. Cancel the pound contract for
retaining animals. Under state statute and county code, they are required to provide safe
pound services.
Work Session Meeting Minutes
October 7, 2002
Page 4
.
4. Authorize the county to renew and continue the animal control license program.
5. Councilor Simmons referenced a letter from Judge Sinclair, included in the agenda item
summary packet.
6. Provide an information/fact sheet that is available as a handout to citizens. This
information sheet will outline services and procedures related to animal control services
offered through Lane County.
Councilor Simmons said the County did not establish a district, they merely opted out of the
state language and utilized county language. He suggested folks review the information from
Judge Sinclair (Attachment 2 of the agenda item summary report).
Councilor Fitch said she might support Option 3, slightly modified. She said we should
review the animal control program at the same time we review budget reductions. At that
time, we could also evaluate funding. She suggested this discussion occur with Budget
Committee members present. She said we may not have the money to fund this but we need
to further research the issue before making a final decision.
Discussion was held regarding potential use of money from a company that may not qualify
for Enterprise Zone exemptions as previously expected. This additional revenue might be
able to help fund the animal control program. Councilor Simmons said if company does not
qualify [now] for Enterprise Zone benefits but qualifies under the state, the money would
need to be paid back. He did not think we could count on use of this money.
.
After lengthy discussion, it was requested that staff look into exemptions regarding
retroactivity of Enterprise Zone benefits for companies.
Councilor Fitch supported a modified Option 3. She referenced the number of calls received
regarding animal control and said the citizens may feel this service is a necessary basic
service. Citizens may opt to fund this service. Since the organization is facing financial
constraints, she would like this issue reviewed again, hand-in-hand, with review of the overall
budget/financial horizon, sometime in January or whenever further review occurs regarding
the budget. She said during this review, we might be able to identify some funding for the
program. She said animal control service is probably not as high a priority service as
responding to burglary, break-ins, etc. We do need to review this along with the Budget
Committee members present.
Councilor Simmons further discussed the company/Enterprise Zone issues, etc. He said if the
referenced company files state action and the company does qualify for the "over $25 M"
category, they could recover that money. He said we will have spent money (funding the
program) and may need to be refunded to the investing corporation. He said the money may
not be available to the city in January.
Bob Duey said he received a report explaining that if the company does not qualify for year
one, there could be no repayment of the money from year one. Once they do not qualify for
year one, there is no retroactive payment. Year two and three could be different. . Councilor
Simmons requested that the City Attorney provide a legal opinion regarding right-of-
recovery.
.
Work Session Meeting Minutes
October 7, 2002
Page 5
.
Councilor Fitch said we should not "add-back" the animal control program at this time, since
funding is not available. This subject does warrant further review.
Councilor Lundberg discussed the difficulty we wouid have monitoring hours dedicated to
the City of Springfield by Lane County. There is no mechanism to define how we use our 20
hours allocated for animal control services. It'.s also difficult to determine how many hours
exceed the base 20 hour allotment. The group further discussed this issue in detail and
discussed hours that have previously been billed to the City of Springfield.
Councilor Ballew said there is support for the animal control program, although, we do not
have funding to support the program. She was ready to support Option 4, suggested by
Councilor Simmons. She said we don't have other options.
Mayor Leiken said during the last council goal setting session, the group recognized that we
are facing financial constraints. He said we have pending ballot measures. The outcome of
the levy will more clearly define the level of services the city will be able to provide. He said
he would like to wait until after the election to make a decision on this issue. If citizens are
willing to support basic services, we might be able to further consider alternate funding.
Councilor Hatfield further discussed alternate funding and legal issues related to this issue.
Councilor Simmons said if we do nothing, we will continue to pay a monthly fee for Lane
County Services. .
.
City Attorney Joe Leahy will contact Lane County and initiate Oialogue with them. He will
inquire about their position related to providing animal control services.
Chief Smith will provide information regarding city of Eugene budget amounts allocated for
animal control services.
A decision regarding restoring or reaffIrming (Animal Control) program elimination will be
made in the near future. .
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Minutes Recorder - Julie Wilson
.
~~
Kim Krebs
City Recorder