Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/09/2012 Work SessionCity of Springfield Work Session Meeting MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL PLANNING MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY, APRIL 9, 2012 The City of Springfield Council met in an. Annual Planning Meeting at Hole in the Wall Barbeque, 1807 Olympic Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, April 9, 2012 at 6:37 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, Communications Manager Niel Laudati, City Recorder Amy Sowa and Stan Biles, the facilitator for the meeting. 1. Council Annual Planning Meeting. Mayor Lundberg said tonight was the Council's annual, meeting to look ahead to the coming year. Facilitator Stan Biles said Council had traditionally held a Council Goal Setting Session. Perhaps a more appropriate title for tonight's meeting would be an Annual Planning Meeting. The three things he would be asking the Council to discuss would be: 1) 2012 in Review; 2) Process Discussions; and 3) Issue Discussions. Mr. Biles distributed 3 x 5 cards to the Mayor and Council.. He asked them to write down something on the cards about themselves that others didn't know, but that they wanted them to know. The cards were returned to Mr. Biles who then read from them while the others guessed who they were about. Following the exercise, Mr. Biles noted how quickly the members had gotten to know each other over the last year. Last year, they had indicated that they wanted to get to know each other on a personal. level. He pointed out that leadership was based on human interaction and relationships, and the Council had formed those relationships. Mr. Biles reminded the Council that when interviewed in 2011 for last year's meeting, there was a lot of tension among members with new people, veteran councilors, questions about protocol and other issues. He asked the councilors to share their thoughts of the Council over the last year. Some of the things the councilors mentioned that had occurred over the last year included: • Maturing • Settled into a groove • Trust had grown • Good Leadership (One Councilor noted that there had been a very difficult issue that had come before Council and she had grown to respect Mayor Lundberg's leadership on how she dealt with the issue both among councilors and the community. ) • Focus on issue not personalities • Everything goes forward • Public well represented in council deliberations City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes April 9, 2012 Page 2 • "The Springfield Way" continues • Stay positive instead of negative • Focus on `how' to make it work • Respect staff — help councilors to be prepared for meetings • Council trusts staff • Council believes staff has well considered the issues • Shared experiences lead to good relationships • Community trusts the Council • Treat each other with respect • Some decisions may be moving Springfield away from traditional approaches /policies /etc • Community hearing things different from perspective of staff • Need staff attitudes to help citizens through the rules Discussion was held regarding public perception when not allowed to do something or required to do something. There were Federal and State laws that the City needed to follow and it was up to the staff to interpret those to the citizens. How that was communicated to the public was important. It was noted that during this recession and the down economy, the City was making changes to be more efficient and do things differently to save resources. The rules from the Federal and State governments impacted the decisions made. Mr. Grimaldi said the discussion was looking at two different issues. The first was the relationship with the community, especially the development community. That was fairly easy to measure and look at ways to address. He reminded Council that staff would be bringing back the Developer Input Process for discussion with Council during an upcoming work session. The second issue was related to policy direction and that was more difficult to identify and change. It was mentioned by a councilor that there needed to be better communication by staff. Some staff may take ownership of an issue and that could cause problems. Another councilor cited the example of the 44t" and Main Street pedestrian crossing as a good example of a positive process between staff and the community that brought about a positive result. The business community wanted jobs and wanted the City to support business. The City needed to be welcoming, but councilors sometimes heard that Springfield's fees were higher than other cities or that the attitude of staff had been arrogant. It would behoove the Council to set policy direction saying we wanted to be the community that welcomed business. Springfield needed to be competitive. Discussion was held regarding the proposal to have business licenses or registers so that new businesses could be provided with information on what they could or could not do in the City. It was noted that many in the business community saw licensing as a negative, so that was one example of things that could have the opposite effect as the original 'goal or intent. The recent sign code exemption was a test and possible segway to look at whether or not a business license or register could move forward. Mr. Biles said there was an economic development discussion coming to Council -in the near future where this issue could be discussed further. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes April 9, 2012 Page 3 Mr: Biles said there was a different dynamic among the councilors than there was one year ago. The newcomers were now part of the `family'. These were positive improvements and it brought the internal function back to the place they wanted. That was rare and he commended them. The Springfield Way was still alive and proud. He acknowledged that listening to the last few comments there were still some issues that needed work. This was an opportunity for additional work or discussion. Overall, the Council had built the foundation from where they were a year ago. The next step was to decide what they were going to do from this point forward. Mr. Grimaldi said a new department was being brought together from two departments and some of the issues raised could be a result of the two departments not being in sync. He was not in denial about the things Council'brought up, but wanted to build on the good things. Roger White, a developer from California, had testified during the April 2 public. hearing and said that although the Glenwood Refinement Plan was not perfect, he had grown to trust staff. We needed to build on that in the community. He noted another example of an SDC issue that was recently resolved by staff.. Mayor Lundberg said how things got fixed was important. When they stopped singling out "The Springfield Way ", it became the norm. They needed to make things right and turn over every rock to, look at ways to make things work. It was important to have an open door. There were good things happening. For things that were negative, the source needed to be found. Mr. Grimaldi said some of the issues were real, and some were spread by one person and became real even when people hadn't experienced them. It was noted that staff needed to be recognized for their efforts so they were energized to do it again. There currently wasn't much happening in regards to development, but staff needed to be ready when things started to move forward. One councilor felt that Council was asking and getting appropriate response from staff when they were presented with information. Another councilor said there were some issues and felt it was a good time to check attitudes and make sure people were on track. There was an opportunity to make positive changes. Mr. Towery noted that. some of the issues councilors had heard from citizens was indicative of tough economic times. The City was in difficult budget: times and we were a smaller organization than a year or two ago. People with lots of experience and skills had left the City, many through retirement. Some of the rules had not changed, but in stressful times became more prominent. Mr. Biles reviewed some ideas offered by councilors during their one -on -one interviews with him. These ideas were regarding process. The first process discussion was "Raising Issues to the Council ". It was noted that to bring an item forward to a Council meeting, there was a process that was outlined in the Council Operating Policies and Procedures. That process could be changed if it was Council's desire. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes April 9, 2012 Page 4 A councilor asked about the best way to bring up new ideas. It was noted that the councilor could discuss it with the City Manager or the Mayor or Council President. Councilors could also talk one - on =one with each of the other councilors as long as they were not tracking votes or deliberating towards a decision. Another avenue was to bring up an idea during Business from the Council- during the regular meeting..That provided the other councilors with the opportunity to offer support or express concerns. Sometimes ideas may not receive support the first time presented, but could be supported later when the timing was better. It was important not to take ownership of those ideas, but to allow the process to work. If something was a good idea, it would resurface when the time was right. A councilor noted that they often sought out information before bringing something to the Council so they had a good background in what they presented. It was suggested that they speak to Council leadership before gathering too much information and spending too much time on researching a topic. One of the main objectives was to avoid surprises. The second process discussion was "Inter oovermrnental Assignments — Reports /Discussions ". During the one -on -one interviews, one of the councilors had mentioned that they often felt rushed when reporting on the committees they served on as Council liaison, and that they might like to have more time. Part of the reason it felt rushed was because Business from the Council was near the end of the meeting. The councilor wasn't sure how much information should be shared and if a written report would be beneficial. Discussion was held regarding the amount of information to be shared. and when to share. Experience helped to distinguish information about the day -to -day meetings and issues that had a potential impact on Springfield citizens. Information on something that could potentially have an impact on Springfield citizens should be shared during that time on the agenda. Each councilor was selected to serve as liaison to the boards, committees and commissions based on their skills.so there was a lot of trust that the councilor would report when something was significant. Not everything needed to be shared. It was suggested that if a councilor was going to present something that was fairly substantative, it might be helpful to let council leadership and staff know ahead of time. Also, if a councilor had an interest in a board they did not serve on, they could ask the Council liaison to keep them informed of activities of that board. Also if there was an issue on one of the. boards that would affect the City or councilors, that should be shared. The third process discussion was "More Informal/Discussion Time ". A councilor had noted that it would be nice to have more time to brainstorm and discuss items in an informal way with the full Council. It was noted that if the Council were to meet to discuss topics of interest, it would be a public meeting which would need to be noticed. Having shorter staff presentations and more time for Council to discuss those items could help provide the time requested. Council was good about reading their packets prior to the meetings, so staff didn't need to provide a lengthy report. This Council did like to have good lively discussions. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes April 9, 2012 Page 5 A councilor asked about . discussing an issue not on the agenda with councilors individually. That could be done, but they needed to be cautious and not share others opinions or votes with the councilors. If a councilor had an item they wanted to discuss during a work session, they needed to go through the process as noted earlier in the evening. Discussion was held about holding meetings like the annual planning session more than once a year, but it was noted that meeting offsite could give a perception of doing things behind closed doors. Meeting regularly at City Hall showed they were being held accountable. The following was determined regarding this process discussion: staff would shorten their presentations in order to allow more time for deliberations; there was a mechanism for councilors to bring an item to a work session; and one -on -one conversations were fine between councilors, but they needed to comply with public meetings law and remain cautious of what was said, how, and that no votes were being counted. The final process discussion was regarding "More Council Legislative Involvement ". It was mentioned that there were a lot of talented people on the Council with many resources. If there were issues that were important to our City, we needed to have more legislative involvement including contacting our representatives and testifying in Salem. Staff could not lobby, but the Council could lobby and put forth ideas. It was noted that the Council did have .influence. It would be nice to have someone on the payroll that could be in. Salem, but the City couldn't afford to pay anyone. They did need to make sure they only testified or lobbied for City issues that the full Council agreed upon. Discussion was held regarding'the League of Oregon Cities (LOC) Legislative Committee and the ability of the Council to use them, as well as staff such as Len Goodwin and Niel Laudati, as resources. Although many of our local legislators lived in town and were aware of Springfield's issues, it was important for Council to support the legislators by going to Salem and testifying. All agreed that Council should limit their support and /or testimony for issues that were of high importance to the City. This provided a great opportunity. Councilors Moore, Ralston and Wylie were interested in participating. Mr. Biles spoke regarding the conditions for Council to participate. An issue needed the full .Council support; Council would establish highest priorities and go for those only; and there would be no surprises. Any councilors planning to testify on a. topic needed to let the other councilors know, such as during a Council meeting. Mr. Biles said the final agenda items were regarding issue discussions. The first issue discussion was "Economic Development" There was a need to stimulate the economy, but there was frustration because of limited resources. They discussed the niche and role of the City Council in economic development. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes April 9, 2012 Page 6 Discussion was held regarding what the City could and could not do in terms of economic development. The City could help promote business and provide some stimulus, but the City couldn't create jobs. The City needed to take care of City business. Coordination with TEAM Springfield was important for economic development. The recent reduction in SDC's was an example. Working with all of the TEAM Springfield partners would make Springfield as attractive as possible. Creating jobs was about creating community. Councilor Woodrow said she wanted some way to `brand' Springfield. She. provided an example of her hometown which revitalized its downtown by using a brand, or image of their city. Once that city determined their image, they found businesses that wanted to invest in that downtown. Springfield had a wonderful history, but needed to move forward. This concept may have been tried in the past, but perhaps now was the right time. Mr. Biles asked if Council wanted to discuss branding further in a work session. Some of this had already been discussed. Council continued their discussion on economic development and the staff's role. Mr. Grimaldi and Mr. Towery were commended, and were asked to challenge staff to ask how they might be able to help the economy through their job. If there was latitude, they could look at where things could be changed. There had been cases where staff had initiated improvements. There was a lot of talent among staff members and if challenged, they could make some effective changes. Mr. Grimaldi said Council was scheduled to have a work session to discuss economic development on May 7. He appreciated the ideas discussed tonight. Discussion was held regarding the annual meetings with TEAM Springfield. The City should come with more of an agenda of what the City would like to see instead of something presented to them. Councilor Moore agreed with the branding issue. The City was getting good press and we should continue to raise the bar and tell people Springfield was a great place. Mr. Laudati said they had found that branding was coming from the people that worked and lived in Springfield on the downtown committees. They would start to see more of that coming out of those committees. It needed to be real and coming from residents. Councilor Woodrow agreed that would come out of those committees. Mr. Biles reviewed the next steps: 1) Look at what staff could do, and what the City could do as the leader for TEAM Springfield; and 2) Conduct a work session on May 7 to discuss economic development further. The second issue discussion was "City Finances ". Discussion was held regarding ways the City could reduce costs. Staff had done a good job at looking at ways to reduce costs in areas such as processes and health insurance. The City needed to continue to reach out to staff for innovative ideas. City of Springfield Council Work Session Minutes April 9, 2012 Page 7 Councilor VanGordon asked if the City could look to see if there was an investment that could provide a return that would help the City in the long -term. Mr. Biles said there was potential for serious discussions about this issue as well as the next two, "Innovations in City Operations and "Setting a Few Top City Priorities for the Next 1 -3 Years ", which deserved more Council time. Everyone agreed. Mr. Biles said the City and Council had done some positive things in the last year. He encouraged the Council to think about the lessons learned for the future. Tonight they had held good discussions and provided clarification on how to raise issues to Council; when to report on their intergovernmental assignments (when important to the City); their diesire to see staff reports shortened to allow time for more discussion by the Council; and when to go to Salem to testify on legislative issues (with support from the full Council). They would discuss economic development further during their upcoming work session. The other three items (City Finances, Innovations in City Operations, and Setting a Few Topy City Priorities for the Next 1 -3 Years) would be discussed at a later time. Mayor Lundberg said they had come a long way and done a good job. She thanked Mr. Biles for facilitating their discussion. Councilor Pishioneri said it was nice to see people fitting in and getting into their groove. He had noticed a change in how the councilors were carrying themselves over the last four to five months. Staff and councilors seemed more comfortable and councilors were expressing their thoughts and ideas. Councilor Moore said she appreciated the expertise of each councilor. They all contributed. Councilor Woodrow said they all appreciated that. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:57 p.m. Minutes Recorder — Amy Sowa Christine L. Lundberg Mayor Attest: ��- Amy So a City Recorder