The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 03 Council Minutes AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 2/6/2012 Meeting Type:Regular Meeting Staff Contact/Dept.: Amy Sowa/CMO Staff Phone No: 726-3700 Estimated Time: Consent Calendar S P R I N G F I E L D C I T Y C O U N C I L Council Goals: Mandate ITEM TITLE: COUNCIL MINUTES ACTION REQUESTED: By motion, approval of the attached minutes. ISSUE STATEMENT: The attached minutes are submitted for Council approval. ATTACHMENTS: Minutes: a) January 9, 2012 – Work Session b) January 17, 2012 – Work Session c) January 17, 2012 – Regular Meeting d) January 23, 2012 – Work Session DISCUSSION/ FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, JANUARY 9, 2012 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, January 9, 2012 at 5:32 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Pishioneri, VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston and Woodrow. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, Assistant City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. 1. Planning Commission Interviews. Planning Manager Greg Mott presented the staff report on this item. The City received three (3) applications for one (1) vacancy during a five week recruitment process. The Mayor and Council chose the questions they would be asking of the applicants. Mr. Mott noted the circumstances around the vacancy due to the unexpected death of Frank Cross. He noted some of the many positive things that Mr. Cross had instituted as Chair of the Planning Commission. It had been a pleasure to work with Mr. Cross. Mr. Mott noted the two options available for the Council to make regarding appointment of the new member; either until May 2012 or for four years through May 2016. The Mayor and Council interviewed the following applicants: • • Mr. Timothy V Mr. Nephi Perry ohs Ms. Joany C. Armstead ayor and Council introduced themselves and asked the following questions of the applicants: • Mayor Lundberg: Why would you like to be on the Planning Commission? e commercial and industrial development with the rights of property owners? Councilor Woodrow: What role do you think the Planning Commission should have with the als to be reviewed participate as a Commission member? • The M • Councilor Wylie: How would you recommend balancing the community’s need for attractiv • revitalization of downtown? • Councilor Moore: The Planning Commission generally meets two evenings each month and additional evening meetings are sometimes necessary. There are also materi in advance of these meetings that may take a couple of hours to read. Given your work and/or family demands, can you fully • Councilor Pishioneri: Springfield and Eugene have or will adopt individual, city-wide refinement plans of the Metro Plan, including separate urban growth boundaries. Do you City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 9, 2012 Page 2 tinue to rely on regional, ese ction r. Vohs had no questions of the Council. He noted that he had worked with Frank Cross on the n r his knowledge of the subject matter, his demeanor, and his approach to business, and he ould miss his contribution in the future. If chosen, Mr. Vohs said he would remain on the Planning nd their qualifications. commended Timothy Vohs be appointed to the Planning Commission. Council asked staff to r positions with the City. 7, . 2011 Annual Financial Report. Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. He introduced Tom Glogau of rove, Mueller & Swank, who would review the audit process, the Independent Auditor’s Report, and ssion. nual ar. Grove, Mueller & Swank, the City’s independent uditors, had completed their audit of the City’s 2010/2011 CAFR and had issued their opinion sses atements. This meant that the City was properly accounting for its resources and using dequate financial controls to help prevent the improper use of those resources. ts. The measures on the handout included unrestricted net assets, capital asset conditions, debt to assets, quick believe this move towards individual plans and away from regional planning is in the best interests of Springfield? Are there any land use issues that should con joint decision-making among Springfield, Eugene and Lane County elected officials? • Councilor Ralston: What is your general understanding of the relationship between the Planning Commission and City Staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council? • Councilor VanGordon: How familiar are you with planning laws and policies and the purpose they serve in Springfield’s land use decision making process? If your experience with th laws is limited, what actions would you take to become more familiar so that you can fun fully as a Planning Commissioner? Mr. Perry asked how the Mayor and Councilors got started in public service and became City Councilors. M Community Development Advisory Committee (CDAC) and during that time had developed a admiration fo w Commission for the duration of the term. Ms. Armstead had no questions, but noted how much she appreciated the Council for their service. The Councilors discussed the candidates a It was noted that all three candidates had strengths and were well qualified for the position. They re encourage Mr. Perry and Ms. Armstead to apply for other voluntee The Council decision on appointments was scheduled for the Regular Meeting Tuesday, January 1 2012. 2 Finance G the City’s CAFR during the work se In accordance with Oregon Statues and the City’s charter, the City was required to complete an an audit and financial statement. The report would be presented to the City Council at the January 17, 2012 regular meeting on the consent calend a thereon. As a preliminary summary for the Council’s information, the auditor’s found no material weakne in the City’s internal financial controls and they issued an “unqualified opinion” on the City’s financial st a Mr. Glogau provided a handout with the overview of the report and noted some of the highligh City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 9, 2012 Page 3 Department was good ata and readily available to the auditors. mount. for their hard work and for keeping the Council informed. ouncil resumed meeting at 6:53pm. . Progress Report for Main Street Pedestrian Crossings. ransportation Planning Engineer Michael Liebler presented the staff report on this item. He er from Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) who as available to answer questions. As a result of the Main Street Safety Study several pedestrian il endorsed the study early last year. ced for as to e future as ODOT scheduled project development. Funds for implementation were available in treet. e nds ntified t along Main, the first crossing onstructed. ODOT identified 3 of the 7 remaining projects for evaluation and construction, with he ratio, change in net assets, and debt service coverage. The City had maintained a strong financial situation over the last year. He also noted that the information from the Finance d Councilor Pishioneri asked about the grant funds noted in paragraph 3 of the Deficiencies Letter. Mr. Duey said the amount was an employee’s fringe benefit that was charged to grant funding that should not have been. It was a very small a Mr. Glogau explained further. Mr. Duey said the adjustment would be made once they received permission from the Federal Government. Councilor Moore thanked staff Council took a five minute break at 6:45pm. C 3 T introduced Carl Deaton, project manag w crossing projects were proposed along Main Street. Counc Pedestrian crossing project progress had been made with advanced plans currently being produ the 43rd Street/44th Street crossing. This crossing was scheduled to be advertised for bids on March 8, 2012 with construction in the summer of 2012. In addition, construction of a second crossing w expected in the summer of 2013. Additional projects were being planned, vetted, and designed in th ODOT’s Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP). Challenges with business access concerns, project scheduling requirements, and other design considerations had slowed the implementation of recommended improvement projects. City staff continued to work with ODOT, LTD, business and property owners, and concerned citizens to implement and develop safe crossing alternatives along Main S Mr. Liebler discussed the power point presentation that was included in the agenda packet. Th Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) had granted ODOT $1M in State Bicycle/Pedestrian fu for pedestrian crossing improvements following a safety study along Main Street. The study ide 8 pedestrian crossings similar to the pedestrian crossings near 51st Stree c targeted construction in summer of 2012 including 34th Street, 41st Street, and 43rd/44th Streets. T 34th Street and 41st Street crossings were postponed to the next construction cycle due to issues with business access. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 9, 2012 Page 4 . When the crossing was first sited, they realized more evaluation was needed to ddress a number of issues such as business access. He noted some of those issues as shown on page 5 ions s that leaving things status quo was nacceptable, so ODOT and City staff were trying to work with business and property owners as much re ded g to the west, but that also affected usiness access and bus locations. r. Deaton said to the west were a lot of accesses to properties with only one access that would be . very small along this area of Main Street. cket. e issue of e length of the vehicles going into their site. He felt that was more of an issue than single access. He ue. he property owner, but he had ince pulled back from that option so further evaluation was being done. There were valid concerns e Mr. Liebler discussed the 43rd/44th Street crossing. There was a high concentration of pedestrian accidents located in this area with three fatalities. He explained where the original location for the crossing was sited a of the power point slide (Attachment 2 of the agenda packet). He discussed some of the other opt that were drawn out for this crossing. The other options also had issues that Mr. Liebler explained. Staff from the City and ODOT met with property and business owners to try to resolve some of the issues. He explained some of the options that were a result of that meeting. There were still concerns that were trying to be addressed. These issues showed how difficult it was to site a crossing due to the number of stakeholders in the area and the concerns of each. Mr. Liebler said the process goals of this effort included early buy-in from surrounding land owners and businesses, and to provide safe crossings at study locations which minimized impacts to surrounding properties and businesses. The understanding wa u as possible to address concerns. With any alternative, there would be impacts. In considering the enti evaluation process, a lot of time had been involved. They were now at a point where they nee guidance from Council on how to progress and move forward. Councilor Moore asked if they considered moving the crossing further west. Mr. Liebler said there were considerations of moving the crossin b M affected. That also put the crossing closer to the intersection of 43rd Street, which would limit median space for vehicle storage for turning Councilor Moore asked if the right-of-way for Main Street had been fully utilized. Mr. Liebler said the right-of-way was The drawing of the original crossing was included in Attachment 2 of the agenda pa Mr. Liebler said the other option shown was the far-east option. Councilor Ralston said he stopped by to look at the RV Store and their issues. He noted th th felt moving the crossing one way or another could resolve the iss Mr. Liebler said one of the options they had worked on with the property owner was to move the access further west and the island further east, which would allow the longer vehicles to make the turns. They had resolution on that option when they first talked with t s and staff continued to work with property owners on a solution. There were still impacts, but they were less than impacts for other properties. Staff would work very hard to mitigate as many of thos impacts as possible. Councilor Ralston said the crossing could be in front of the coffee shop. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 9, 2012 Page 5 ing it in any direction caused other impacts. The best they could do was to easure the impacts and be as fair as possible. There would likely be calls on all of the future ons. ppreciated the involvement of the usinesses in that area. Safety of the citizens was the primary goal and concern. He would like to give extent d down. It was scary to cross Main Street and edestrian safety was the goal. She knew someone that was killed on Main Street and she thanked staff in or something to be done to address the safety issue; 2) DOT concerned with the traffic flow along Main Street; and 3) Businesses trying to address this d re d est plan possible was very portant and he encouraged staff to continue working with those stakeholders. It was also important his as an opportunity to look at that stretch of Main treet for pedestrians, cross connections, better signage, and broader openings to the businesses. It was Main Street to look in the future. It would be etter for pedestrians and businesses, and make the area more attractive. She knew that the other irector Len Goodwin presented the staff report on this item. Staff from anipac that were present in the audience were General Manager Scott Johnson, Joe Wonderlick, hise hauler for solid waste, had quested an increase of 9.95 percent for residential and 7.95 percent for commercial hauling rates and to add a voluntary Food Waste diversion program for commercial customers. Finance Department and Mr. Liebler said mov m crossings as they would all include impacts of some type. Councilor Woodrow said when they met with the property owners, they looked closely at all opti Councilor Pishioneri thanked staff for their work. He also a b staff the ability to work towards the best resolution. Councilor Moore said she assumed all of this would lend itself to slowing traffic down to some in the whole area. She noted how difficult it was to locate access to some of the businesses, and that it could be a benefit to businesses to have traffic slowe p and ODOT for their work on this project. Councilor Woodrow said she had been very appreciative of everything she had been involved with this project. It was important to recognize that there were three sets of stakeholders in this project besides the City: 1) A community looking f O without hurting their business. It was a balancing act and everyone had come to the table trying to find the best solution. It was important to recognize that everyone had tried to talk and work this out an find a balance. In the long run, once the eight crossings were in place, it would create a pattern that would be safer for pedestrians and drivers. With the new crossing at 51st Street, she had become mo aware of the crossing and pedestrians. It was moving in a good direction. Councilor VanGordon said for him it took going to the site and looking at the options. He appreciate staff and the councilors for taking the time to be involved in this project. Leaving it status quo was not acceptable. Building the partnerships between the stakeholders to find the b im to make sure the businesses stayed in business. Councilor Wylie agreed with Councilor VanGordon. Mayor Lundberg said she would like to look at t S a chance to be proactive in looking at how we wanted b crossings would be very difficult. She encouraged staff to continue to work with the business owners to try to find resolution. 4. Sanipac Rate Increase and Volunteer Food Waste Program. Assistant Public Works D S Candelaria Sevcik and Adam Balough. Sanipac, the City’s franc re City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 9, 2012 Page 6 iod ban Consumers (Portland –Salem MSA), had increased by 6.79 ercent. At the time of the 2008 adjustment, staff concluded that the increase at that time would the uncil tainer would cost $65.52, and a 1 yard trash container would be $79.40. This asked if providing a discount for the food waste program was financially viable r Sanipac. ney for Sanipac. ease could remain viable before they needed to come back for another increase. r. Goodwin said the overall percentage of personnel costs over the last three or four years was about e in the future. e was ot acceptable. Public Works staff had reviewed the request and found it appeared to be reasonable, given the per of time since the last rate increase. Sanipac’s rates had not increased since July 2009, when Sanipac passed through a fee increase imposed by Lane County to cover disposal of waste at the Short Mountain Landfill. Prior to that, the last increase in Sanipac rates occurred in May 2008. During that time, consumer prices, as measured by the Consumer Price Index, all Ur p provide an appropriate rate of return for a minimum of two years. Under the proposed increase, rate for a 35 gallon container would increase $1.43, from $14.45 to $15.88, and for a 65 gallon container $2.09 from $20.95 to $23.04. For comparison purposes, the equivalent rates in Eugene, allowing for the $1.50 recycling credit, which was built into Eugene’s rates, would be $21.45 for a 35 gallon container and $38.55 for a 65 gallon container. Rates for other cities were shown in the Co Briefing Memorandum Sanipac also proposed to institute a food waste diversion program as a service to its commercial accounts. This program, (which began in Eugene in November 2011,) would allow Sanipac to divert food waste away from the land fill and allow participants to reduce the size of their trash containers. The rate for commercial food waste containers would be 20% less than a comparable trash container. A 1 yard food waste con program could allow a business to cut costs by reducing the size of the trash container as a result of adding a food waste container. Staff recommended that Council approve the 7.95 percent increase in commercial and 9.95 percent in residential for Sanipac’s hauler’s portion of the solid waste collection rates for all categories of waste collection. Staff also recommended that the voluntary Food Waste program be made available to commercial clients. Mr. Goodwin noted that any increase during this economy was not a good thing, but the rate proposed was reasonable based on the financial situation of Sanipac. Councilor Woodrow fo Mr. Goodwin noted the many ways it could help to save mo Councilor Woodrow said she was in favor of the food waste program. She asked how long the proposed incr Mr. Goodwin said it appeared to be viable for about three years. Councilor Ralston asked what percentage of Sanipac’s increase was related to personnel cost. M 14 ½ percent. They were expecting about a 3 to 5 percent increas Councilor Ralston said other people were losing their jobs and taking pay cuts, and this increas n City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 9, 2012 Page 7 ouncilor Wylie said the effort to reduce the impact on the landfill should be lauded, but the increase had increased should be done. Sanipac’s costs had increased, but the citizen’s income ad not increased. She was supportive of the land fill issue, but not supportive of the rate increase on r. Johnson said there was not a bi-weekly for the 20 gallon cart, but there was a bi-weekly option for r. Goodwin said Attachment 3, although labeled Yard Debris, was for garbage rates. he would like more of those ptions provided for individuals. She agreed with Councilor Wylie that increases on citizens were ns available. ouncilor Moore asked if they had figures on how many recycled. so high in comparison to Eugene nd other cities. r. Goodwin said Springfield’s rate structure supported residential at the expense of commercial cost. r. Grimaldi said that historically Eugene had gone through an elaborate rate analysis and had ouncilor VanGordon said he was surprised that depressed recyclable commodity values were ee g to the citizens. He would like to hear how they could keep e next increase from being ten percent to cover employee costs in the future. He understood there e of e number of years since the last increase. They did continue to work through efficiencies nd rerouting to maintain stable rates. consumer price index (CPI). C on residential rate was another rate increase on our citizens. She felt a study on how much all rates paid by citizens h residents during this tough economic situation. Councilor Moore asked if there were options for bi-weekly pickup for the 20 gallon cart and what was that cost. M the 35 gallon cart. The bi-weekly for the 35 gallon cart was $10/month. M Councilor Moore said she wanted to encourage people to recycle more. S o difficult. It was important that people had their garbage picked up, but she wanted optio Mr. Johnson said only about 30 percent of the customers used the yard debris program. Sanipac could promote that service more to help people offset the cost by people downsizing their trash. C Mr. Johnson said at least two-thirds or more of those with service. Councilor Moore asked why the charge for the 2 yard container was a M It was somewhat opposite in Eugene where residential costs were higher. M separated commercial from residential. C included in the mix of key operating cost increases for Sanipac. He noted the amount of employ compensation that was being passed alon th were increased employee costs, but the challenge was investing the money in a way to offset som those costs. Mr. Johnson said the employee costs included more than just salary, such as health insurance and benefits. Fuel was the second highest cost of doing business. The personnel increase looked large because of th a Councilor VanGordon asked what the employee raises in their contracts had been. Mr. Johnson said they had matched the City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 9, 2012 Page 8 d on CPI. ir ability. The commodity piece as also a big factor for them. He explained. ouncilor VanGordon expressed his concern regarding linking commodity costs with personnel. andelaria Sevcik from Sanipac said they looked at what market analysts anticipated regarding the r did fluctuate. ouncilor Pishioneri said he had seen the changes in labor and costs. He noted that the net operating the many small increases citizens faced with all of the fees they were being charged at added up to a large amount. Sanipac had done a wonderful job for Springfield. He would expect ouncilor Pishioneri said he would suggest Sanipac come back with a proposal that wasn’t such a ouncilor Woodrow said this was a lot when added to the other fee increases. She asked if it would kly pick up of the 20 gallon can at a discounted rate. She understood the rational for a te increase. k from Sanipac said they did have some alternatives such as the yard debris program. hey could work with the customer service staff to find other solutions to better fit customers’ needs. a r. Goodwin said he would meet with Sanipac to work on those objectives. Councilor VanGordon said moving forward we would still expect to see raises base Mr. Johnson said they would try to manage the costs to the best of the w C Commodities seemed too variable to be used. C fluctuation of commodities over the next few years. Historically, they did come back every three o four years. She acknowledged that those prices Councilor VanGordon said he could see why the proposal was written, but felt the mid-range was a better choice. C income projections were significantly higher in the future which made him think the increase was too much. He noted th that they would come to Springfield with the lowest figures they could come up with for their new rates. Mr. Goodwin said it sounded like Council wanted to look at an increase somewhere between the low and high range. C large increase. C be possible to offer an alternative for single person households that did not generate a lot of waste, such as a bi-wee ra Mr. Johnson said they would need to look further into that option. Joe Wonderlic T He noted alternatives used in other cities. Mr. Johnson said picking up a 20 gallon cart still required trucks to make the runs and gather the recycling. Springfield should be proud of their rates, and Sanipac would try to maintain good rates. Their staff would brainstorm some ideas. Mayor Lundberg said she would like Sanipac to bring some alternatives back to Council, and also mid-range increase rather than the high-range increase. M City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 9, 2012 Page 9 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:04 p.m. inutes Recorder – Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor ttest: ity Recorder M A ____________________ Amy Sowa C City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2012 The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Pishioneri, VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston and Woodrow. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Matt Cox, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. 1. City Prosecution Services. Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery presented the staff report on this item. To be successful, the City’s continuous process improvement effort required that existing services be examined to determine if appropriate measurable benchmarks had been established and that contracts for services were reviewed for reasonable cost. The Finance/Judiciary Committee was recommending to the full Council that the current services related to the municipal court and prosecution services undergo such a review. In addition to providing Judge and staff time to provide for a municipal court, the City maintained contracts with outside contractors for the other services. Among these were city prosecution services, indigent representation, psychiatric evaluations and interpreter services. Prosecution services was a single provider (Mr. David Logan) while the other three services may have multiple vendors under contract at the same time. Recent budget activity for these services was a follows: Actual Actual Actual Budget FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 Prosecution Services $232,776 $232,776 $245,917 $232,776 Mental Health Evaluations $1,950 $0 Indigent Representation $98,246 $136,021 $199,279 $186,000 Interpreter Services $3,455 $4,867 $5,572 $6,000 The current contract for prosecution services was a long standing contract that, with the recent opening of the municipal jail, had seen significant changes in work load and types of activities on which the city prosecutor and his staff spent their time. For these reasons, the Financial/Judiciary Committee was recommending that the scope of work for this service be reviewed by staff and be so directed to prepare a request for proposal. It had also been considered in recent years to alter the method of providing for indigent representation services. At this time the Finance/Judiciary Committee was not recommending a change in how the service providers were selected, but had recommended that staff review the internal methodology of determining how defendants qualified for representation services and the appointments for multiple charges. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 2 Councilor Moore asked if there had been an increase in indigent services since the jail had been opened and more people going to trial. She asked if there was a balance in the increase of fines brought in and the services needed. Mr. Towery said with the exception of leasing beds to outside agencies, the jail had outdone the original expectations in terms of revenues. The fines were more than any of the individual costs listed. He noted that Councilor Pishioneri had asked for some historical reports from the City Prosecutor’s Office and staff was in the process of gathering that information. That information would be shared with the Council once it was received. The reports would show the workload in the City Prosecutor’s Office before the jail was opened and since it had opened. Councilor Pishioneri asked if there had been any anomalies regarding the indigent representation and any issues regarding the billing of some of the attorneys. He asked if they were following the general rules of thumb. Mr. Towery said the last time he talked with the Court Supervisor Kathy Cunningham, she had said the Court was generally satisfied with the response from the attorneys who had received the appointments. There were a couple of attorneys that had sought indigent appointments that the Court didn’t support. Those attorneys were no longer given appointments. Judge Strickland was satisfied with the service the Court was getting on indigent services. Councilor Pishioneri referred to the disbursements from last month and the charges for indigent cases and interpretive services. The contract for interpretive services stated that the interpreters needed to follow the ethics of the State Board of Interpreters, but did not require them to be licensed by that board. He felt the interpreters used by our Court should be licensed and certified. Mr. Towery said he would follow-up on the interpreter concern. Regarding indigent cases, he noted that Ms. Cunningham said they tried to balance the work over time. He explained. Councilor Ralston said someone that was certified might charge more. Councilor Pishioneri said they should all charge the same. City Attorney Matt Cox said sometimes the non-certified interpreters did show up and work at the same rate as those that were certified. Mayor Lundberg asked what staff needed from the Council. Council was fine with staff going out for an RFP. Mr. Towery said it had been many years since the City had gone out for an RFP, and the jail was fairly new. Staff would want to review the scope of services to make sure it was current and also retain some outside counsel to go through this process. Because this process may take some time, it may be necessary to do a month-to-month or extended time contract with the current City Prosecutor. It was unlikely staff would be able to get through the entire process before Council’s summer recess. Staff would provide Council with timelines and reports on the process. Councilor Pishioneri agreed it needed to be done right, so going month to month or extending the contract with the current City Prosecutor was fine. He asked if staff had given any thought about how they would choose a selection panel of people with expertise for the RFP process. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 3 Mr. Towery said once a process was mapped out, they could review it with Council during a work session with some options. 2. Public Works/Development Services Reorganization. Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery presented the staff report on this item. Last spring, in addition to the departures of Susie Smith, Public Works Director and Bill Grile, Development Services Director, several other employees chose to take advantage of the voluntary separation program, to retire or to pursue opportunities for professional advancement. Those vacancies created opportunity and uncertainty as well as impacts on workloads and service levels around the organization. In the interim, the City Manager asked for an exploration of the structure of both departments. Together and separately, the City Manager and Assistant City Manager met with most of the work groups and individuals before making any decision on a work approach. Ultimately, a facilitated process, using several group listening sessions and one-on-one interviews with internal and external stakeholders was used to solicit input from all of the employees in both departments. From there, a representative work group was assigned to address four major questions: • What does the New Organization LOOK like? (One Department) • What does the New Organization LOOK like? (Two Departments) • What does the New Organization ACT like? • What does the New Organization Deliver? After the resulting work was presented to employees and the Executive Team, the City Manager decided to implement a single department structure with five divisions. Director recruitment would occur soon, expecting an appointment by mid-March. An implementation team would be appointed to review and make recommendations related to detailed organizational structure, reporting relationships, work assignments and locations. Recommendations may be implemented before or after Director appointment. Mr. Towery presented a power point presentation on this item. Many people had been engaged in this process and he appreciated all of their work. He noted that Raquel Wells from the City of Eugene facilitated this process and did an outstanding job. She was assisted by Library Director Rob Everett and Police Analyst Mike Harman. He noted other staff that were instrumental in this process. The goal of this process was to break down silos, improve communication, and come up with a working team approach. He discussed the issues that were addressed through the interviews and the process. A large number of staff took the opportunity to attend inforums, staff meetings and were kept up to date through a newsletter. Mr. Towery noted that four task teams were convened. Task Team A1 came up with a proposal to have a single department with five divisions. He displayed a slide of what one department with five divisions could look like. The five divisions included administrative, capital program, development division, environmental services division, and operational division. Another task team determined what the department would act like. They came up with the following recommendations: • Recommendation #1 – Be “real” about the intent of changes in the organizational culture. • Recommendation #2 – Develop a tool kit City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 4 • Training & Coaching • Communication • Ease Restrictions • Authority Check In • Evaluation & Knowledge Sharing • Creating Flexible Work • Recommendation #3 – Assess the quality of working Teams to identify what is and is not working and implement improvements. • Recommendation #4 – Utilize a “Team Coach” from the start of a Team formation for guidance and assistance. • Recommendation #5 – It is OK to immediately begin Team assessments, discussions and improvements. • Recommendation #6 – Supervisors seek performance feedback from other supervisors, peers, customers, and team members. Mr. Towery discussed what the new organization would deliver. He noted that the team identified the factors used when work was prioritized, most of which was done already. The team also identified the skills, talents and abilities of a leader that would support this organization and the goals for service delivery. The characteristics the group identified for a leader were: • Provide balanced knowledge of department business lines • Provide confidence in decisions made • Ability to delegate (trust decisions of staff) • Focus on needs of the City • Empower staff (provide protection from external forces) • Ability to deal with personnel challenges • Politically astute and savvy • Flexible, consistent and fair Mr. Towery said staff had been at this for about 10 months and an implementation team would soon be launched. He displayed the schedule in the power point and said that by mid-to-late February they hoped to have a set of recommendations to provide enough clarity about the structure of the department to discuss with prospective applicants for the director’s position. The posting for the director position would be open in January. Division managers and supervisors would be recruited for over the course of this month. Some divisions looked similar to what was already in place, while others were not. They could be looking for existing incumbent or temporary assignments for career development. Depending on who filled those positions, additional appointments may need to be made. The City hoped to appoint a director by Mid-March. Mr. Towery said the existing budget assumed a $300,000 budget reduction from the FY11 level, and they were confident they would reach that mark. The FY13 proposed budget would balance within current projections city-wide. The budget process would be unusual going from two separate departments to one department. He explained further. There were about 15 vacancies in both departments; some funded and others not. Councilor Ralston said this was interesting. He asked if there was a title for this or an existing program. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 5 Mr. Towery said much of this work was very consistent with Continuous Process Improvement. Some of it also came out of the High Performance Organization movement. Neither were the drivers, but were used to inform much of the work. Councilor Ralston said he did not see efficiencies in the list of things they wanted to see. He didn’t want to see a decrease in staff and increased workload. Mr. Towery said efficiency did come up and was part of the complete document, but was not presented in the power point. There was a lot of discussion about being efficient and effective. The employees understood operating within our means. Councilor Pishioneri said he was impressed with all of the work done. He recognized that this process took a catalytic leader, a leader who trusted their staff. To fail to do so could bring failure or lowering of efficiencies. This was a great measurement. He spoke regarding career development and noted that sometimes when career development training was offered to some but not others, it caused a divide. It was important that career development was not focused on specific individuals. There were people that wanted to go to training, but didn’t want to ask. Mr. Towery said early in this process the assembled management team of the two departments and the union representatives discussed organizational development and team work. One of the things that came out of this was that when they reconvened the task team, they needed to have the right people involved. Sometimes the same people were chosen for these types of teams, but this process had also included people that were not usually involved. They were chosen because they helped to fill in one or more of the areas that were critical for a team. Every level of employee was represented through this process. Those people then served as ambassadors back to their departments. Many people that were involved were in the audience during tonight’s work session. Councilor Woodrow asked if they could put the results of their experience into the tool kit. Mr. Towery said this tool kit was specifically about how to effectively build and maintain these types of teams. This would not just be used by this new department, but across the organization. Councilor VanGordon asked about the general feeling of staff regarding this process. Mr. Towery said there was ambivalence, fear and anticipation in moving through this process. There was more understanding about this process, but there would be some that had fear. These types of things needed to be worked through as they moved along. Councilor VanGordon asked if there was a check-in date as they looked forward to implementation. Mr. Towery said that had not yet been scheduled, but one of the things that came out of the process was to come back and check in with staff. Councilor VanGordon said this could be very successful if the staff felt empowered. They were going from two tight knit departments to one large department. He asked about the number of vacancies in the departments. Mr. Towery said filling the positions that were vacant would not increase the number of employees that the City already had this year. That was independent from this process, although did influence the effort. They didn’t go into the process determined to reduce staffing by a certain amount. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 6 Councilor VanGordon asked what the overall savings would be for the City going to one department. Mr. Towery said that was difficult to say. They had estimated about $300,000, but more details were needed. They could report that to Council. Councilor VanGordon said this was great work. He understood it was hard work, but showed the dedication of our staff. DeeDee Thomas, Administrative Assistant in the Public Works Department, provided an example of efficiencies. Development Services Department had two people in administrative support, and Public Works had four. Those six employees had come together to discuss job duties and how they could share in their responsibilities to get the work done with less resources. Councilor Wylie said it was very well done and was quite sophisticated. She was very impressed with the in-house effort. We didn’t always know what we could accomplish until going through the process of learning what had already been done. They had put together fantastic teams and she could see how they were building on what they were learning. She projected more efficiencies would show up as they moved forward. Many forms of government were looking for new ways to do business and from that came excellence. That’s what she saw in this project. The outcome was excellence. Councilor Woodrow said she was appreciative of staff trying to allay the fears of the employees through open communication. That impressed her, as well as the process. She appreciated the openness. Mayor Lundberg commended staff for their work. The recipients of this work would be the public and the community. She had seen an attitude to operate as if we were in competition for our community’s business and everyone had bought into doing that. It was most appreciated. She asked Mr. Towery to pass along the Mayor and Council’s gratitude to the participants and staff. Mr. Grimaldi thanked Mr. Towery for his leadership and the team for all of their work. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:51 p.m. Minutes Recorder – Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ____________________ Amy Sowa City Recorder City of Springfield Regular Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 2012 The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 7:00 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Pishioneri, VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston and Woodrow. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Matt Cox, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Lundberg. SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT 1. OCCMA Presentation – OCCMA Past President Eileen Stein. This item was cancelled and would be rescheduled to February 6. Ms. Stein was unable to attend due to the weather. 2. Award of Comcast Grant. Assistant Public Works Director Len Goodwin presented this item and noted this item was also under the Consent Calendar. The City had challenges getting information out to the public such as providing immediate live feed of joint elected officials meetings. Anything that could be done to get those meetings and events out to the public was a benefit for both the City and the citizens. With funding, the City would have the capacity to provide live feed in the Library Meeting Room and the Justice Center Emergency Operations Center (EOC). LCOG would bring their crew and camera to the meeting, so there would still be a cost, but it would be substantially reduced. Another initiative was to try to further enhance the usability and viability of the Wildish Theater. If we were to put a distribution facility in the theater that could handle video distribution it would allow A3 School to train their students in video production, and put their own productions out over the public access channels. With this technology, Willamalane could use the Wildish for other productions. Also through this grant, some minor enhancements could be made in the Jesse Maine Room, such as improving the screens for presentations. Not all of these projects could be done with the $75,000 in grant funds, so staff would bring a proposal to the Council, MPC and LCOG to seek additional funding from a grant that Comcast made available to the three jurisdictions. That grant was in the amount of $100,000; $50,000 to the production unit that covered the public channel and $50,000 that could be made available to any other of the jurisdictions. The City of Springfield had never applied for that grant, but with this proposal would seek this additional funding to finish the projects described. The City would also be talking with Willamalane and the School Board with respect to the improvements at the Wildish Theater for some minor support. If the grant application was successful, the City would take $5000 from the grant to put towards the Library Summer Reading Program, as Comcast had City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 2 not been providing funding for that program over the last couple of years because of staffing changes. Councilor Pishioneri asked who would own the equipment at the Wildish Theater. Mr. Goodwin said that had not been settled, but would be up to Council. Councilor Pishioneri said if the City owned the equipment, we could allow it to be used by the public at no cost. He would like to make sure ownership of the equipment was identified. Mr. Goodwin said if that was the direction of the Council, staff would include that in the agreement. Councilor Woodrow said she agreed. She noted use of equipment from Willamalane and documentation that was required. Mr. Goodwin said prior to installing the equipment, an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) would need to be formed with Willamalane. At that time, they could specify ownership of the equipment by the City. Mayor Lundberg said tonight’s motion would just be to accept the grant. Comcast had been a good corporate partner with our City over the years and this was a good example of that partnership. She felt accepting the grant for this purpose was important. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Claims a. Approval of the November 2011, Disbursements for Approval. b. Approval of the December 2011, Disbursements for Approval. 2. Minutes a. November 28, 2011 – Work Session b. December 5, 2011 – Work Session c. December 5, 2011 – Regular Meeting d. January 9, 2012 – Special Regular Meeting 3. Resolutions 4. Ordinances a. ORDINANCE NO. 6274 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTIONS: 5.5-100-125, 5.17-105, 5.17-120, and 4.2- 105A.4, MODIFYING SITE PLAN REVIEW, MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY SUBMITTAL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES. 5. Other Routine Matters City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 3 a. Approve or Reject a Motion to Accept a One-time Grant from Comcast in the Amount of $75,000 to Support Providing Improved Capacity to Distribute Video from Public Facilities in Downtown Springfield. b. Approval of the Liquor License Endorsement for USA Gas #62526, Gasoline Station with Convenience Store Located at 5733 South Main Street, Springfield, Oregon. c. Approval of the Amended Council Operating Policies and Procedures. d. Accept the City’s 2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. e. Authorize City Manager to Sign the Fourth Amendment with Ad Group (a Division of Shelton Turnbull) in the Amount Not to Exceed $260,000 for 2012 FireMed Campaign Advertising and Marketing Services. f. Approval of the Purchase of Police Vehicles for Fiscal Year 2012. g. REMOVED IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WITH CHECKS #110737 & #110892 OF THE NOVEMBER, 2011 DISBURSEMENTS AND CHECK #111271 OF THE DECEMBER DISBURSEMENTS, AND ITEM 5G REMOVED. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. ITEMS REMOVED 1. Check #110737 and #110892 of the November, 2011 Disbursements, and Check #111271 of the December Disbursements. Councilor VanGordon declared a conflict of interest as these payments were made to his employer United Parcel Service (UPS). He abstained from voting. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPROVE CHECKS #110737 & #110892 OF THE NOVEMBER, 2011 DISBURSEMENTS AND CHECK #111271 OF THE DECEMBER DISBURSEMENTS. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSTENTION – VANGORDON). 5. g. Authorize City Manager to Sign a Contract with Tyler Technologies for Municipal Court Case Management Software and Hardware City Attorney Matt Cox presented information on this item. He described the contract for software that would move the City and other local jurisdictions away from the AIRS program. When negotiating a contract with this company, it was a seven year contract which concerned the City Attorneys. The City Attorney’s Office proposed a non-appropriation clause that would allow the City to get out of the contract with no penalties. Tyler didn’t agree with that and came back with a counter offer with a proposed schedule. With this schedule, if the City breached the contract before 3 years, the City would owe 75% of the remainder of the balance. If the City breached the contract after 5 years, the City would owe 50% of the balance, and between 5-7 years, 25%. Mr. Grimaldi said this was actually a good deal for the City. Normally when buying software, you paid up front, then a smaller annual fee. With limited funds, it worked better to spread the cost of the purchase out over seven years, which Tyler had agreed to accept. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 4 Mr. Cox said they talked with Municipal Court staff today who were very excited about this software. They had looked at it carefully and it appeared to be exactly what they wanted. Councilor Pishioneri said his concern was the current contracts with Motorola, EIS, and a different bundle with Eugene. He worried about the compatibility of the software with those systems. Mr. Grimaldi said the City would need to use the same system that would be used by the County Jail and the new system would need to talk with the City’s Jail and Court system. They would make sure they could be compatible. Councilor Pishioneri was concerned and wanted to be sure they could communicate among those different system. Mr. Grimaldi said they had planned on doing and making it work. Mr. Lathrop was in Texas confirming that it would be compatible. Mayor Lundberg said they were authorizing the City Manager to sign the contract, but if Mr. Lathrop found that it wouldn’t work, he would not sign. Mr. Grimaldi acknowledged that Councilor Pishioneri raised a legitimate concern. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPROVE ITEM 5G. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. 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. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE COUNCIL RESPONSE CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS 1. Correspondence from Cheryel Whitsell and Joe Soukip, Cherokee Drive, Springfield, OR Regarding the Railroad Crossing at 32nd Street. (with attached staff response) IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RASLTON TO ACCEPT THE CORRESPONDENCE FOR FILING. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. BIDS ORDINANCES BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 5 . 1. Committee Appointments a. Planning Commission Appointment Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery presented the staff report on this item. The seven- member Planning Commission had one vacancy due to the passing of Frank Cross in November 2011. The City received three applications for this vacancy during a five week recruitment process. Mr. Vohs resides at 3708 Cherokee Drive and is semi retired, property and rental manager and occasionally works for the Register Guard. It was the City’s practice to appoint for the term remaining, but because of the circumstances of this vacancy Council agreed to appoint Mr. Vohs to fulfill the remaining term of Commissioner Cross and an additional 4-year term. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO APPOINT TIM VOHS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO SERVE A FOUR-YEAR AND FOUR-MONTH TERM WITH AN EXPIRATION DATE OF MAY 5, 2016. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. 2. Business from Council a. Committee Reports 1. Councilor Woodrow said Rachael Chilton from the City’s Environmental Services Division, would be working on community outreach with the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC). Beginning in February, a quarterly newsletter would be put out from the website. Those that would like to receive the newsletter by email could sign up on the MWMC website. She was pleased they were adding community outreach. 2. Councilor Moore said she was still basking in the light of the State of the City Address. She thanked those staff that were involved in preparing for that event. She also went on the Martin Luther King Jr. March with Councilor Pishioneri and said it was a good event. 3. Councilor Pishioneri reported on the McKenzie Watershed Council meeting held last week. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) changed their process regarding fishing regulations. He still had concerns regarding fishing on the McKenzie River and continued to follow that closely. The new process allowed citizens to make proposals on regulation change and a hearing to present those proposals. There was a citizen proposal coming forward next month to reopen the area currently closed to bait fishing and to continue stocking that section of the river from the hatcheries. He was hoping the Council could endorse that proposal to encourage the citizens of Springfield to be able to use that section of the river for recreational fishing. Mr. Grimaldi said staff could present a letter to the Council for their approval. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 6 Mayor Lundberg asked Council if they were ready to direct staff to prepare that letter. Council consensus was for the City Manager to draft a letter. Mr. Grimaldi said staff would get the letter ready. b. Other Business BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER 1. Intergovernmental Agreement for Encroachment Permitting Between Springfield Utility Board and the City of Springfield. Civil Engineer Matt Stouder presented the staff report on this item. Implementation of the new Accela Automation Software had allowed the City to streamline and improve its existing encroachment permitting process, benefitting both the City and permit applicants. Staff updated the encroachment permit application to provide clearer directions for applicants, and to allow for electronic submittal, in turn allowing the application to be reviewed simultaneously by affected reviewers. The result had been a decrease in application review time and easier and more efficient record keeping and tracking. While the encroachment process was regularly used by individual citizens, utility companies performed the majority of the encroachment permit work in the City. The Springfield Utility Board (SUB) was the largest single user of the process, and both the City and SUB had found it mutually beneficial to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) to address specific needs with respect to encroachment permitting (Attachment 1 of the agenda packet) and to formalize current practices. Attachment 2 of the agenda packet was a form copy of an encroachment permit which would accompany the IGA. Because SUB would be continuing to accept liability and holding the City harmless for work performed under the encroachment process, the form copy needed to be signed by the heads of the Water & Electrical Departments, respectively. Individual permits would be signed as they were issued by the department head’s designee. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR RALSTON TO DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (IGA) BETWEEN THE SPRINGFIELD UTILITY BOARD AND THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD. THE MOTION PASSED WTH A VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST. 2. Intergovernmental Agreement with Lane Council of Governments Covering Payments under the Housing and Urban Development Sustainable Housing and Communities Grant. Assistant Public Works Director Len Goodwin presented the staff report on this item. City Staff had reached an agreement with the Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) concerning the distribution of funds to the City of Springfield under the Housing and Urban Development Sustainable Housing and Communities grant. Council approval was needed to authorize execution of the Agreement. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 7 On September 19, 2011, the Council, by Resolution approved a memorandum of Understanding among the City of Springfield and a number of other jurisdictions creating the Lane Livability Consortium. At the same time, the Council approved the Lane Livability Consortium work plan designed to fulfill the terms of a Sustainable Housing and Communities grant awarded by the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department. This grant funded certain activities by the City, including activities related to the University of Oregon Sustainable Cities Year program in which the City was participating, and activities related to scenario planning required by the Central Lane Metropolitan Planning Organization in connection with the Jobs and Transportation Act (HB 2001) approved by the legislative Assembly in 2009. Under the budget developed for the approved work plan, the City would receive approximately $264,850, and would provide services of staff evaluated at $111,450, as a match to the grant proceeds. The staff costs the City would be leveraging was for work the City had already planned to do, so was not an additional burden. Under the terms of the grant, all grant funds would be disbursed to the Lane Council of Governments and would, subsequently, be disbursed by them to participating jurisdictions in reimbursement of expenses incurred. The proposed Intergovernmental Agreement set forth the terms and conditions of such reimbursements. The agreement had been reviewed by staff, who recommended approval. The Agreement had been approved as to form by the City Attorney. Mr. Goodwin said staff was still making progress on the work plan and the tasks under the work plan. This agreement would allow the City to receive those grant funds. Councilor Moore asked for clarification on this grant. There were a number of things related to sustainability. Mr. Goodwin said this was the Lane Livability Consortium which was operating under a Housing and Urban Renewal Department sustainability initiative grant. The Sustainable City Year was a project with the University of Oregon. Councilor Ralston said he still had concerns. According to the document, it appeared that the federal government was setting priorities on local plans, policies and economic goals and he didn’t feel the federal government should be dictating our goals. The goals stated that they were trying to ensure social equity. The guise was economic development, but had other policies included. He noted the reference to climate change. He didn’t feel it was to our benefit to get funds and play by someone else’s rules. Councilor Woodrow said she researched social equity and found there were numerous definitions and found that it was situational or case specific. One of the tasks in this work plan was to define social equity for our area. Basically, it was part of our constitution. Councilor Wylie said she felt many people had worked to come to common ground. The people working on these plans were people that were involved in our local work and we worked with throughout our community. She felt the federal government was recommending local agencies to think about economic, climate and other issues. This was an opportunity to provide input regarding those issues. Councilor Ralston said part of the group that was deciding this was Eugene, and Springfield and Eugene didn’t always see eye to eye. Councilor Wylie said there were a lot of differing opinions among Springfield as well. City of Springfield Council Regular Meeting Minutes January 17, 2012 Page 8 Mayor Lundberg said the City’s contribution was work we were already doing. The partnerships were already in place, and the City came out $200,000 in the good from the grant. As in all of our joint efforts there were challenges, but we could set it up so Springfield was doing Springfield’s business. Councilor Pishioneri said Springfield’s concerns were heard and Springfield retained control and the ability to opt out of the IGA if it went in the wrong direction. He understood the hesitancy, but felt the group of people working together was doing a good job. He thanked staff for their work on getting this IGA to this place. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR WOODROW TO APPROVE A MOTION APPROVING THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 1 AGAINST (RALSTON). BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned 7:38 p.m. Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ____________________ City Recorder City of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2012 The City of Springfield Council met in a joint work session with the Lane County Board of Commissioners in the Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, January 23, 2012 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg presiding. ATTENDANCE Present from Springfield were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Pishioneri, VanGordon, Wylie, Moore, Ralston and Woodrow. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery, City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff. Present from Lane County were Board Chair Leiken and Board Members Handy, Sorenson, and Stewart. Staff members from Lane County were also present. Commissioner Bozievich was absent (excused). Commission Chair Leiken read the title of this item. “This was a Matter of Amending the Eugene- Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram, Glenwood Refinement Plan Diagram and Text, Springfield Zoning Map, and Springfield Development Code” 1. Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project, Phase 1 (Glenwood Phase 1). Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery introduced this item. He introduced Courtney Griesel, Management Analyst, and Gary Karp, Planner, who would be leading the presentation. Ms. Griesel introduced Planning Manager Greg Mott. Mr. Mott said this project had generated more enthusiasm than any other project he had seen during his tenure at the City. He gave credit to the citizen advisory committee (CAC ) who attended 18-20 meetings, tackling every subject in a very thoughtful way. The members didn’t always agree, but had agreement on how they would get to the decision points. A prominent theme throughout was maintaining a sense of place for Glenwood, with full understanding of the depth of potential for Glenwood due to its location and characteristics. The potential was unprecedented in our metropolitan area. Their allegiance to the vision developed by the City Council was respected throughout the process. The visionaries and the realists came together during this process, recognizing that potential, and that was recognized by the Planning Commissioners. He was encouraged by their tenacity and commitment, which was reflected in the document prepared by the CAC, which the Planning Commissions endorsed. Ms. Griesel presented a power point presentation. She said the project core team met weekly on this project for about 3 years, discussing how to communicate and work with the CAC and address their concerns. Mr. Karp said the elected officials could ask questions throughout the presentation. City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 2 Ms. Griesel said the Glenwood area was something staff had been looking at since the mid-1980’s. Since it became an urban renewal district staff had focused on revitalization, business development, and infrastructure planning. The community and staff had jointly been looking at Glenwood and how to make it easier to live, enjoy, access, and develop in a respectful and new way. The current process started in 2008 following Council direction to make Glenwood a priority. She referred to the timeline in the power point presentation and noted that we were now near the end of the process. Ms. Griesel said this part of the refinement update was focused on Phase 1. It included all of the riverfront areas, as well as the Franklin and McVay corridors. Phase 2 would go through a similar process. Refinement plans in general were used in staff’s 2030 plan. Completion of the City’s residential and housing needs analysis showed that there was a need for 28 gross acres of high density residential within Springfield. This was a great opportunity to find some high density residential. Ms. Griesel noted that while looking at Glenwood, staff was also looking at downtown, acknowledging that downtown served a purpose for Springfield that needed to be different than Glenwood. Retail might be focused for downtown, where Glenwood offered an opportunity for mixed-use housing, employment, and innovative design features and development that we had not done before. The Plan established a vision for the Glenwood area understanding the densities, infrastructure and facilities that would be required to support housing and employment in this area. The Plan also helped with transportation and infrastructure planning to support future development. Another aspect of the Plan was to look at urban design standards, ways to protect natural and historic resources, and update policies. It was important to make sure that the plans and policies supported those things, but did not make it more difficult to develop. The next step was to look at system development charges (SDC) to make sure they aligned with policies in the Refinement Plan. Ms. Griesel noted that citizen involvement was a huge part of this project. Staff met extensively with the CAC, held a series of open houses, engaged with the Glenwood Renewal CAC, communicated to the public, and met with the Planning Commissions. The CAC met 18 times over 3 years and reviewed the entire plan. Through this process, great relationships were built although they did not always agree. The process ultimately resulted in the recommendation of the Plan to the Planning Commissions from Springfield and Lane County. Public testimony was received during the Planning Commission meetings which resulted in more dialogue with the Commissioners and the public which resulted in some changes. The final Plan was now before the City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners. The vision had been looked at by staff and outside groups over the course of the last three years. Everyone looked at it in the same way: connectivity, amenities, natural resources, new types of urban development, higher standards, and respect for the existing community. Commissioner Handy asked about “green fingers extending into the community” as noted in the power point. Ms. Griesel said that included things like park systems and natural resources that providing connections throughout the entire area. It was important to make sure there was access to open space. Ms. Griesel noted the tour to Hillsboro taken by City staff, the City Council and some of the Planning Commissioners. The tour included the Orenco Station and the Streets at Tanasbourne and provided some designs, parking options, ways to integrate ground floor commercial and retail with upper story residential or office use, some street designs and utilization of parks in an urban area. She referred to some renderings of Glenwood that showed the feel of the area. City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 3 Mr. Karp noted that the drawings were in the Plan. Ms. Griesel said plan goals included improved public connections to the Willamette River, open public spaces including parks, aesthetically pleasing design, mixed-use suitable to unique development, opportunity for development of a variety of housing, opportunity for businesses to provide goods and services and restoration and maintenance of ecological areas as public resources. At the same time, it was about celebrating Glenwood and the contributions Glenwood made to the area as a gateway to both cities and its close proximity to the I-5 corridor. They wanted to look at this area with the goal of improving it from a transportation enhancement perspective, making it safe and accessible for everyone to use, and also a Plan that facilitated redevelopment. The process started by looking at what conditions currently existed. The first visioning in the development of Phase 1 was looking at potential street grids, trying to understand densities, capacities and land uses in the area, and looking at what the riparian riverfront corridor meant for redevelopment. There was extensive staff work put into the creation of some of the Phase 1 documents including a wetlands inventory, the Commercial Industrial Buildable Lands (CIBL) inventory, and the residential land analysis. Through Phase 1, they looked at how to use vertical and horizontal uses, how to use high density residential in the mix of uses, where employment opportunities could be identified, how to serve hospitality needs and how to determine design elements. Ms. Griesel displayed some photos of mixed-use in our area and other areas. She spoke regarding the different mix-use options to be considered. Mr. Karp said the retail uses in Glenwood were limited to serving the development in the area. There were policies in the Plan and in the Code to address that issue. Ms. Griesel noted there was a need for office mixed-use and employment. She displayed photos of other employment mixed-use that was currently in the Gateway area. This area was a good example of where the design guidelines for buildings worked very well. Regardless of what was going on in the inside, the outside was attractive for surrounding businesses and residents. Ms. Griesel discussed Franklin Boulevard and the planned design to make it a multi-lane boulevard allowing different modes in different directions. The Franklin Boulevard design was done independent of the Glenwood Refinement Plan, however was used by staff to reflect and build upon. The new design managed how connections were made to the north area in a different way. She explained. Commissioner Handy asked about integrating transportation planning with what was being done in the Refinement Plan now instead of later. Mr. Karp said transportation planning was currently happening. The design of Franklin Boulevard had been approved by City Council and staff was starting on the NEPA study for the design. The road had various nodes and included transit and pedestrian travel. While the final result would be completed after the Plan was adopted, the groundwork had been laid. Ms. Griesel said the re-design of Franklin Boulevard would not only provide access, but would provide safer pedestrian crossings. Integration of roundabouts had been used in the Plan for safety reasons and traffic management. The Bus Rapid Transit (EmX) ran down Franklin Boulevard to Gateway, and the multi-way boulevard allowed transit to be integrated into the system with dedicated lanes. This was also an opportunity to integrate public art and wayfinding. City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 4 Ms. Griesel said they used the Franklin Boulevard concept and looked at street grids in the Franklin riverfront area making connections, trying to support redevelopment and also making the area bicycle and pedestrian friendly. She referred to the map of the area and identified the local collector streets, main routes along the Franklin riverfront. Staff looked at design elements to slow down traffic and make bicyclists and pedestrians feel safer. Sidewalks were addressed in the Plan and would be on both sides of the street, continuous, wide, and set back and buffered from traffic. She explained further. Parking had been discussed extensively. It was important to find the right balance to encourage alternative modes, but also accommodate vehicles. The Plan provided flexibility to work with the developer regarding parking needs. There would still be a need for restaurants and other businesses to receive daily inventories of goods, so loading and parking areas were addressed. Councilor Moore said Hillsboro had a lot of alley access. She asked if that was part of this Plan. Mr. Karp said there could be alleys developed or parking on the streets. He spoke regarding landscaping and pedestrian scale lighting. Ms. Griesel said the Plan left some flexibility for the developer. She discussed open space used for recreation and stormwater quality management. The ‘green fingers’ referred to earlier included two park blocks that ran through the north/south area surrounded by residential. This allowed those residential units to call this area their ‘backyard’. There were two different uses for the park. The first was to have activities such as ball fields, manicured lawns, etc. The second was to handle drainage, such as a swale with meandering paths. The riverfront park was a long linear park. This park helped to reconnect our community with the river with a bike path and open spaces. Commissioner Sorenson asked who owned the riverfront land and how it would get into public use. Ms. Griesel said it was a mix of private owners. Mr. Karp said if someone came in to do a development, there was language in the Refinement Plan that a certain amount of that area would be open space which Willamalane could take over in the future. Commissioner Sorenson asked if Willamalane taking over as the owner of the riverfront property was in the Plan. Mr. Karp said it allowed them to be, although was not required. It was difficult to say what type of development would occur. The intent was to work with the developer to find a plan that worked for the City and the developer. Ms. Griesel showed drawings of neighborhood park blocks and a riverfront park. Commissioner Leiken said a significant property along the riverfront was owned by Oldham and had been an industrial use that may have some contamination. He asked who would be responsible for the environmental cleanup. Mr. Karp said the developer would work out an agreement with the property owner. Before the development could occur, annexation to the City would be required. Any studies regarding contamination would need to be agreed upon by the buyer and seller. Willamalane wouldn’t get City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 5 involved until the development started to occur. By then, any remediation would have already been addressed by the property owner. City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith said the State Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) handled remediation issues. Cleanup would be based on the use of the property more than on who owned the property. DEQ had a program to work with property owners to help mitigate. Commissioner Leiken asked if there was something set in terms of the realignment of Franklin Boulevard to provide some certainty to developers. He asked for an update on the funding for the Franklin Boulevard realignment project. Traffic Engineer Brian Barnett said the alignment for Franklin Boulevard was not set with a high degree of precision, although there was an area for the road to align. There was some latitude of where it could shift within that area. The purpose of having the area identified was to allow them to make the best decision for the final design. The City was about to launch the NEPA process which could take about 18 months. A decision on the project should be ready at that time. The NEPA project was expected to look at a build/no build option. Jurisdictional transfer was still under discussion. Mr. Towery said the urban renewal agency could also be involved in the acquisition or development aspects of some of the public rights of way, bike paths and parks. He noted that City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith had responded to an earlier question for those that did not know her. Commissioner Stewart asked about how much flexibility to change there was in the Plan. As an example, he asked how much flexibility there would be in the Plan to accommodate if the Roaring Rapids property redeveloped into a convention facility. Mr. Karp said amendments to the Development Code were being proposed that created a process for certain modifications, such as relocating streets. It would involve a public hearing process before the Planning Commission. Since most applications would be Type II Review, this process would fit. There were mechanisms to make it flexible. Commissioner Stewart said in the past the City tried to get a developer in Glenwood. At that time, they found there wasn’t demand and it wasn’t economically feasible. He asked if that lesson had been taken from the previous plan and been factored into the new Plan. Mr. Karp said there were currently two entities that wanted to develop in Glenwood once the Plan was approved. One presented to the Planning Commission in December and talked about development costs. They thought they could get through the process without major issues. Through the upcoming public hearing process, more developers may come forward. Ms. Griesel said when Apex (the developer referred to by Commissioner Stewart) was looking at redevelopment, the old Plan didn’t extend south of Franklin, so there was no assurance that if they developed a high end development on the north side, there would be a complimentary redevelopment to the south. This process allowed staff to respond to that concern. Commissioner Stewart said some of their concern was that the market study didn’t support development. Councilor Pishioneri asked about the 75 foot setback and if that was the minimum. City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 6 Mr. Karp said in 2002, the City approved a 75 foot riparian setback. The Willamette Greenway made the setback line to be the same so they were consistent. The Willamette Greenway coexisted with the riparian area, which was a no-build area. The second 75 foot setback allowed building as permitted by the zoning. Councilor Pishioneri referred to the bike/pedestrian path in that area. He said it seemed unclear about some of the features required in the setback area. As a developer, he would not like to see additional encumbrances. Mr. Karp said the first developers would need to go through the standards with City staff. The City couldn’t force them on some of the features. Councilor Pishioneri referred to the staff report about peer review and noted concerns. Mr. Karp said the peer review had been required when this was first drafted. Based on feedback on peer review, staff had presented the Planning Commission with three options: to keep the peer review as it was written; modify the peer review; or delete the section requiring peer review. The Planning Commission voted to modify the process. Now the text read, “the Planning Director may require peer review”. Peer review was for cases when staff didn’t have the expertise and additional feedback was needed from a professional. Councilor Pishioneri asked why peer review would be required here and not anywhere else in the City. Mr. Karp said it would not always be required. Councilor Pishioneri said the Plan seemed to be full of requirements to dress up the area, but felt there needed to be a balance. He asked if it could pencil out for developers. He also addressed the finger parks. In Hillsboro, the parks were 180 feet wide, which he felt was very wide for a park. He asked if we could look at decreasing that area to 150 feet to account for areas lost to dressing up. Mr. Karp said 150 feet was for stormwater management. Willamalane was going to require 180 feet for their parks. Mr. Towery said the park blocks would be located in the areas with high density residential. There was a need pursuant to Willamalane’s Master Plan for a certain amount of parks and open space for development, so it served a dual purpose. Councilor Wylie said being dressed up were the amenities that developers and consumers were demanding in modern development. People expected this type of thing when looking for a place to live and spend money. She was excited about this area and could visualize high-rise residential, overlooking the river, with grocery, pharmacy, beauty parlor underneath and a park across the street. They were forward thinking and moving toward modern design spaces. Commissioner Leiken said Orenco Station struggled in the beginning, with a lot of the issue being the housing component. He was pleased to hear this plan was flexible. Commercial and business would grow before residential. He wanted to make sure the flexibility stayed in place. He liked the multi-use path along the river and felt it would be a great selling piece for this area. City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 7 Mr. Karp said 33 of the 268 acres in Glenwood Phase 1 were dedicated to high-density mixed-use. The rest was office, commercial and industrial. As development occurred on either side, residential could follow. There was no requirement that said residential needed to go first. Ms. Griesel said what was different in Glenwood was the riverfront. Mr. Towery said they had heard that over time the residential component at Orenco Station had broken even. Orenco also had a large component of single detached homes, and that was not considered as part of the residential development in Glenwood. Mr. Tamulonis said the Orenco Station development had gone through three iterations of development. Springfield was trying to learn through their mistakes. The housing component staff looked at towards the transit line could be replicated in Glenwood. Having the river was a positive amenity. Councilor Woodrow said she loved the whole concept. She wanted Glenwood to be a destination, not an isolated area, and she thought it should be marketed as such. She was excited about everything planned, but didn’t want it to be an enclosed area. She would love to see a conference center in Glenwood. Mayor Lundberg said this was a primary riverfront property and should be shared. She noted that Crescent Village, which was designed to be an urban village, was now advertising for other people to visit their restaurants and retail. If Glenwood was a destination, there needed to be adequate parking. If we planned for a little more parking, some could be removed, but if there was not enough to begin with, it could not be added. She noted the challenges of parking in downtown to encourage people to come downtown. We were trying to encourage transit, bike and pedestrian transportation, but we also needed adequate parking for cars. She had come to the point of flexibility with the ability to change as we moved along. She would like to know how that could be accommodated. She was also concerned about peer review and about property along McVay which did not have front or side of the building parking. They needed to have some, even if just a few, parking places out front for those that could not walk around the building. She would like to keep that option open. She thanked those on the CAC for their work over the last three years. This was very good work. She agreed that the riverfront should be available to everyone. Commissioner Handy thanked staff for the presentation and for the CAC. Our world was changing in terms of transportation, and we would see an interest in living closer to downtown and near transit. Business invested in areas where transit was fixed and the EmX provided that assurance. Some of the concerns regarding parking would be addressed by the transit system. He asked how the vision would be reached without having it chopped up in sections. Mr. Karp said it would depend on what the City could offer regarding incentives and through urban renewal. Mr. Tamulonis said the urban renewal district in Glenwood was anticipating additional revenue over the next few years with a couple of developments that had occurred. That would allow the City to provide incentives for developers and perhaps some assistance to alleviate some of the problems that occurred in the past. That would be on a case-by-case basis for some time, and there could be a delay in some of those things. There were system development charges (SDC’s) and credits that could be applied depending on the development. Staff had been looking at grants and loans to help with some City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 8 of the investment. The City had a small set of things available now and some could be negotiated. Some of those areas had been identified in broad categories such as infrastructure, roads, sanitary sewer, and parks. There could be some assistance for housing if mobile home park tenants needed to be relocated. Commissioner Handy asked about urban renewal revenue over the life of the district. Mr. Tamulonis said it was outlined in the Urban Renewal (UR) Plan. When the UR Plan was first formulated, it was based on anticipated activities. We had not yet seen the revenue stream occur related to those projects. The Franz Bakery development occurred several years ago, and the taxes from that development would come on next year. We were slightly behind on those revenues. The plan that was discussed with Apex only included a small area and no assurance to the developer for the surrounding area. He spoke regarding property option values which were relatively high at that time, and noted that property owners had now adjusted their market values for potential developers. Some of the issues faced by Apex had been solved by development interest and the new Plan. Mr. Towery said the Plan contemplated development proposals being processed through master plans with a five acre minimum. That would alleviate the piecemeal development. Councilor Moore said she was very excited by the Plan. She asked about parking. She liked going to events at the Hult Center and parking underneath or in the parking garage. She wondered about issues of groundwater related to underground parking. Mr. Karp said it would be an issue as it would contribute to the cost of a project. Developers would sit down with staff to go over their plans before submitting them for approval. No studies had been done initially. Councilor Pishioneri asked if the new Plan would allow someone to put in something like Roaring Rapids with the parking standards. Mr. Karp said the parking standards were based on square footage, so there could be a different amount of parking allowed. Councilor Pishioneri asked if the proposed Plan would preclude something like The Olive Garden, which generally required a large area for parking, from being developed. Mr. Karp said the amount of parking was based on the size of the restaurant. If there was a nearby office building, some of the parking spaces could be shared. He would have to go back and look at the Plan to provide a specific answer. Councilor Pishioneri said he wanted businesses that could do well and wanted to make sure we weren’t prohibiting successful businesses. He also didn’t want businesses to rely on neighboring businesses for spill-over parking. Mr. Karp said it would be part of a 5 acre master plan and they would look through it. Staff had been open to getting businesses to a ‘yes’. Mr. Barnett said trip generation analysis had been done to address parking and the mix of uses. In areas A, B, and C (north of the railroad), they took a 20% reduction in trips based on the mix of uses City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 9 and the parking standards, including on-street parking. One trip needed to service multiple uses. Some of the people that lived in the area would not need to drive. It was important to remember that they justified the 20% reduction in trips based on those concepts. Without that reduction in trips, the trip numbers were intensifying in the area causing a significant situation under the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). Commissioner Leiken asked if Springfield had talked with City of Eugene staff about the Franklin Boulevard corridor and the connection, especially with the draw of the Matthew Knight Arena. Mr. Tamulonis said he had been in conversations about the Walnut Street node and redevelopment in Eugene. Staff from both cities had talked a lot about the implications in those developments. The corridor in Glenwood would look similar to what was in front of the PC Market in Eugene. They were already seeing people going to restaurants in downtown Springfield and taking the EmX to the Matthew Knight Arena, and they hoped to see more. That was likely to happen on the Eugene side, too. Councilor VanGordon asked if that type of trip reduction had been demonstrated anywhere else in the City. Mr. Barnett said Springfield didn’t have nodal development inside the City, but the information had been developed from a variety of national studies. Based on the type of land use identified in Glenwood, a 40% reduction was actually a consistent figure. Staff had opted to be conservative. Councilor VanGordon asked if Orenco Station demonstrated that type of reduction. Mr. Barnett said he didn’t have specific information on Orenco. There were other Oregon sites included in the variety of studies reviewed. He said he could find out about Orenco Station and provide that information to the councilor. Councilor VanGordon asked how employment and housing could be linked together. There was no guarantee someone would work and live in one area. Mr. Karp said that was correct, there was no guarantee. The hope was that permitting commercial areas to occur would attract residential. There was no requirement. Ms. Griesel said from an economic development standpoint, they would try to get at that by talking with developers and businesses that had employment bases with employees that was interested in nodes and living and working in the same area. Some included things the City could do, but much of it was market driven. Councilor VanGordon said the conversation had to be about how to make Glenwood an option friendly area. All of us were needed to support the commercial sector, and he would like to see what other development had seen regarding people living and working in the same area. Mr. Barnett said the studies he had referred to regarding transportation were measuring that affect, based on amenities, services, and employers. Ms. Griesel said they needed to be cautious when looking at studies because Glenwood was such a unique location. They could find some samples to try to find a balance. City of Springfield City Council/Lane County Board of Commissioners Joint Work Session Minutes January 23, 2012 Page 10 Mr. Towery reminded the audience that only 33 acres of the 286 were for residential development. They were looking for the opportunity and the mix of housing. There was no illusion that all of the employment would be supported by the residential. One important difference between Orenco Station and Glenwood was the access to transit. Glenwood had the EmX, and Orenco Station had much less access to transit. That factor played a prominent role in the trip generation figures. Councilor Moore noted the many times she and her husband used the EmX. Councilor VanGordon said many used the EmX in combination with their vehicle. Mayor Lundberg said the City had always been consistent about having flexibility. This was going to take a leap of faith, yet the City needed to continue to get information so the elected officials could make good decisions. This was one of the most brilliant changes in the landscape between the two communities. Mr. Karp said the next step was a joint public hearing. That hearing had originally been scheduled for February 21, but would be moved to March. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Lundberg adjourned the Springfield Council Work Session, and Board Chair Leiken adjourned the Lane County Board of Commissioners Meeting at 7:06 p.m. Minutes Recorder – Amy Sowa ______________________ Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ____________________ Amy Sowa City Recorder