HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 04 Council Minutes AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 6/18/2012
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) May 21, 2012 – Regular Meeting
b) May 29, 2012 – Work Session/Tour of Lokey Laboratory
c) June 4, 2012 – Work Session
d) June 4, 2012 – Regular Meeting
e) June 11, 2012 – Special Regular Meeting
DISCUSSION/
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
None.
City of Springfield
Regular Meeting
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, MAY 21, 2012
The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street,
Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, May 21, 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 Matthew Cox, Planning Secretary Brenda Jones and members of the staff.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Lundberg.
SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Claims
a. Approval of the April 2012, Disbursements for Approval.
2. Minutes
a. March 13, 2012 – JEO Public Hearing
b. May 7, 2012 – Work Session
c. May 7, 2012 – Regular Meeting
d. May 14, 2012 – Work Session
3. Resolutions
4. Ordinances
5. Other Routine Matters
a. Adopt a Motion to Approve a Special Procurement Process for the Springfield Police
Department SWAT Team Rifle Replacement.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
RALSTON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR WITH CHECK #113896 OF THE
APRIL 2012 DISBURSEMENTS REMOVED. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6
FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ITEMS REMOVED
1. a. Check #113896 of the April 2012 Disbursement.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 21, 2012
Page 2
Councilor VanGordon declared a conflict of interest because check #113896 was to his employer,
United Parcel Service. He abstained from the vote.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
RALSTON TO APPROVE CHECK #113896 OF THE APRIL 2012 DISBURSEMENTS
REMOVED. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1
ABSTENTION – VANGORDON).
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
1. William Vaughn, 4410 Aster Street, Springfield, OR. Mr. Vaughn said he was before Council
several months ago and was still trying to get a stop sign in front of his house on the corner of
44th and Aster. He had 173 signatures from his neighbors to get a stop sign put at this location.
Following the recent traffic study, he was to meet with Len Goodwin, but they had not yet
met. A week ago on Sunday he witnessed a 19 year old boy get hit on a bicycle at this
intersection. Richard Perry, an engineer with the traffic division, told Mr. Vaughn that the
only way around the federal guidelines was for the City to put up a stop sign for him. He was
tired of finding injured people. Staff told him there were only two accidents on record at that
location, but Police provided him with reports of four accidents. Yield signs had been put up,
but were not working. He wanted a stop sign as this was a dangerous street. He had a copy of
all of the signatures with names and numbers. (The document was entered into the record.)
There was a new dead end sign and street light at this intersection, but neither helped.
Mr. Grimaldi said staff was still in the process of completing the study and Mr. Goodwin
would be meeting with Mr. Vaughn.
Councilor Pishioneri said he had taken interest in this and assured Mr. Vaughn that they would
follow up once the studies were complete.
Mr. Vaughn said it was only a matter of time before someone died.
Mayor Lundberg thanked Mr. Vaughn for coming and noted that Mr. Goodwin would get in
touch with him when the study was complete.
2. Gretchen Harris, 904 65th Street, Springfield, OR. Ms. Harris said she owned a duplex and
was protesting the legality of Ordinance 6269. She was sure Council consulted the City
Attorney before they enacted this ordinance, but she wondered if any of them consulted their
dictionary. According to Webster, the definition of a ‘business’ is an ‘occupation, trade, or
profession; operations of a detail or trade industry, or commercial enterprise; a firm; a factory;
a store’. She said she was none of those. Webster described an ‘investment’ as ‘the investing
of money or capital to gain interest or income’. Ms. Harris said she invested in her duplex and
was not a business. In investor was described as one who invested in stocks or bonds or real
estate. Everyone knew that real estate was one of the best investments. An investment didn’t
require a business license. When she was reaching retirement age, she did not have a pension
or savings account, and she knew she could not live on Social Security alone, so she invested
in her duplex to help pay her high property taxes and supplement her Social Security. There
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 21, 2012
Page 3
were home businesses that should be required to have a business license. She noted that the
City was not requiring assisted living facilities to pay a fee for each apartment rented, or
retirement apartments. Those were businesses, but buying a single family home or duplex to
rent out was an investment, not a business. Ordinance 6269 was illegal and was concocted
behind closed doors. She felt it was taxation without representation as no one was notified.
She was told it was enacted because there were so many tenants that had complaints about
property repairs that the owners were not taking care of and the City had to send out inspectors
to investigate. It seemed logical that if that was the case, the owner would be charged a fee if
the complaint was valid. If the complaint was not valid, the tenant should be charged. There
were no City programs related to small scale rental properties, or rental code in Springfield to
justify the fee. The City was looking to stabilize the General Fund budget on the backs of
small scale rental property investors. This ordinance must be abolished and any money
collected should be refunded.
3. Ken Eilers, 449 9th Street, Springfield, OR Mr. Eilers said he was not here to offer criticisms
or complaints about the rental property business license. He had the privilege of living and
doing business in Springfield for almost 60 years and it had been a privilege. He was surprised
when he received the notice in the mail for the business license, but he realized it amounted to
only $0.87 per month. The amount didn’t bother him; however, the ordinance passed last July
after the current budget was set. He suggested that since the invoices didn’t arrive until just
recently from the ordinance passed last July, the City should just forget the next year and
begin assessing the license fee for next fiscal year and put it into that budget. He thanked the
Council for their time and their service to the community.
4. Irene Alltucker, Relief Nursery. Ms. Alltucker said the Relief Nursery had reached a milestone
and raised enough funds to break ground on June 19 at 10:00am. She invited the Mayor and
Council to attend the groundbreaking. The families were very grateful that they would be
providing services in Springfield a year from now. Invitations to the event would be sent.
COUNCIL RESPONSE
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
1. Correspondence from Jim Daubenspeck, Springfield, Oregon Regarding Rental License Fee (see
attached staff response).
2. Correspondence from Paul Conte, Eugene, Oregon Regarding Eugene’s Decision on the Capstone
Project.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
RALSTON 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
1. Committee Appointments
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 21, 2012
Page 4
2. Business from Council
a. Committee Reports
1. Councilor Pishioneri reported that he attended the Prayer Breakfast on Friday, May 18,
which was well represented by Springfield.
2. Councilor Moore thanked the citizens of Springfield for coming out and voting on
Tuesday, May 15.
3. Mayor Lundberg reported on Spring Cleanup. She said it was a fun event and was
received well by the citizens.
4. Councilor Woodrow said attending the end-of-the-year Sustainable City Year event on
Friday was fantastic. The presentations by the students were captivating and the students
were very passionate about their work. It was great knowing the City had been involved as
a partner in that project.
Mayor Lundberg said Council would receive a format that the City could use.
5. Councilor Pishioneri said being at the Spring Cleanup was great fun. Citizens were very
supportive of the event and he had received requests to see if the City could put on this
event twice a year. It was a significant event. He commended staff who volunteered their
time to this event.
b. Other Business-
1. Councilor Pishioneri spoke regarding the renter license program. When Council initially
enacted the rental license program, it seemed appropriate. They received very little public
input in the last year, but had received a lot lately. Since that time, they had received
multiple calls, emails and testimony regarding this license. As a Council, they took the
public input very seriously and appreciated the feedback. It was important to respond to it
in the right way. He would like the Council to re-evaluate the options surrounding this
ordinance and review it during the next regular meeting on June 4.
Mr. Grimaldi suggested they hold both a work and regular meeting in the event they chose
to take action to modify or repeal the ordinance. The sooner they met on this the better as
people were continuing to come in and pay the fee.
Councilor Pishioneri asked that staff send out no further notices and stop collecting the
fee.
Mr. Grimaldi said that was currently being done. Council could direct staff to come back
with several options for consideration. Any options would be brought forward in a way
that Council could act upon them immediately.
Council agreed that they wanted to move forward with that as soon as possible.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 21, 2012
Page 5
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
1. Ratification of the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) FY12-13
Regional Wastewater Program Budget and Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
Environmental Services Manager Ron Bittler presented the staff report on this item. The FY 12-13
Regional Wastewater (RWP) Budget and CIP document was approved by the MWMC on April 13, 2012.
In preparing and reviewing the Budget and CIP, the MWMC convened three work sessions and a public
hearing prior to taking action to adopt the FY 12-13 MWMC Budget. The FY 12-13 Budget funded all
operations, administrative services, and capital projects planned for the Regional Wastewater Facilities.
The approved budget included a 1.7% increase in administrative costs and a 3.3% increase in operations
and maintenance (O&M) expenses. The increase in administrative costs was primarily resulting from a
change in methodology in calculating indirect costs consistent with the MWMC IGA. The increase in
O&M was due primarily to an increase in personal service expenses at the treatment facility.
The CIP outlined and described the capital projects planned for the next five years. The FY 12-13 RWP
Budget and CIP document reflected a continued focus on the completion of facilities upgrades and
expansion, and operations and maintenance activities to provide wastewater treatment for a growing
community through 2025 in a manner that protected the public’s health and safety, and the environment.
The Commission took a corresponding action to adopt a 4% increase in regional wastewater user charges in
order to fully fund the Budget and CIP. On May 7, 2012 the City Council held a public hearing on the FY
12-13 regional rates within the City. Following the public hearing, Council adopted a resolution to set the
FY12-13 regional rate within the City of Springfield.
In accordance with the IGA, the MWMC contracted with the City of Eugene for operations and
maintenance services, and with the City of Springfield for administrative services. The attached budget
document provided regional program and budget summaries as well as detailed budgets for services
provided by Eugene and Springfield. The budget document also provided information about how the RWP
activities were driven by the MWMC established goals and performance measures.
The FY 12-13 RWP Budget and CIP must be approved by the MWMC and ratified by Lane County, the
cities of Eugene and Springfield, and then finally adopted by the MWMC, prior to the beginning of the next
fiscal year (July 1, 2012). The Eugene City Council was scheduled to ratify the MWMC Budget and CIP on
May 14, 2012, and the Board of Commissioners was scheduled to ratify the MWMC Budget and CIP on
May 23, 2012, with MWMC final budget adoption on June 8, 2012.
Mr. Bittler noted that the principal budget driver continued to be the 2004 facilities plan. Eighty-eight
million dollars had been invested in the regional treatment plan in terms of upgrades. This budget also
reflected a continuation of that effort with $23.6M for next year’s capital program, with a five-year capital
expenditure of $94M. Funding had come from two revenue bonds in the amount of about $94M, and also
from State Revolving funds of about $19M. This budget included a 4% rate increase to insure MWMC
covered existing bonds and debt service payments, as well as the operations and administrative budget. He
was proud of what they had done with the operating budget over the last few years. This showed a 2.8%
increase over the previous year, 1.7% for administrative and 3.3% for operations and maintenance. The five
year budget for administration had been reduced over the past five year by 6.4%. That had come through a
lot of hard work and adjusting staff as they changed the needs of the capital program. Much of the capital
costs were built into the first part of the facilities plan and meeting wet weather requirements. As the
regional efforts had reduced the capital output for each of the years, the budget had been adjusted in
staffing accordingly.
Mr. Bittler outlined the process for each of the jurisdictions to ratify the MWMC budget.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 21, 2012
Page 6
There were no questions from Council.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
RALSTON TO ADOPT A MOTION RATIFYING THE FY 12-13 REGIONAL
WASTEWATER PROGRAM BUDGET AND CIP. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE
OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
2. Resolution for Electronic Commerce Zone Preparedness.
RESOLUTION NO. 2012-06 – A RESOLUTION OF SPRINGFIELD REQUESTING THAT
THE SPRINGFIELD COMMUNITY ENTERPRISE ZONE BE DESIGNATED FOR
ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AND AUTHORIZING THE SPRINGFIELD CITY MANAGER
TO SUBMIT THIS RESOLUTION TO THE STATE OF OREGON FOR APPROVAL UPON A
FIRM’S INTEREST IN LOCATING SUITABLE FACILITES IN SPRINGFIELD
Community Development Manager John Tamulonis presented the staff report on this item. When
Springfield extended the Enterprise Zone in 2010, Springfield was considering other permutations to
sponsorship and development areas to include in the application sent to the State of Oregon for
consideration. Not requested, at that low point of the recession, was adding an electronic zone for
those firms primarily using the internet for commercial activities that might consider locating in
Springfield. With the economy improving Springfield should consider passing a resolution indicating
Springfield’s interest in having an E-Zone added to the local incentive package available to firms and
allowing the City Manager to present the Council’s request for designation to the State of Oregon
upon a suitable firm’s expressing interest in locating here. Oregon had, perhaps, one remaining e-
commerce zone to designate out of 60 and Springfield could be a prime location for a variety of call
centers given the range of such facilities now in our community.
The ‘e-commerce’ zone had only a small, if any, local effect (related to the minimum value of exempt
property for Enterprise-Zone eligible firms) and provided for eligible firms making capital investments
and doing transactions on the internet or internet-based computer a credit equal to 25% of the capital
investment made in a year against the business’s annual state income or corporate excise tax liability
(maximum $2 million credit in a year and unused credits may be carried forward over the next five
years). He referred to the map in the agenda packet outlining the areas being considered for this zone.
Councilor Ralston asked if the entire city was covered under the Enterprise Zone.
Mr. Tamulonis said it was not. The map outlined the area which did not include a large area in
Thurston and the Jasper Natron area. The Enterprise Zone covered about 11.4 square miles of the 15
square miles that made up Springfield. The City may ask to have the boundary adjusted in the future
which could be done through the State. It was not allowed to have the whole city in an Enterprise
Zone.
Councilor Pishioneri asked Mr. Tamulonis to explain electronic commerce.
Mr. Tamulonis said electronic commerce would include businesses that took orders, made sales or
purchases, provided customer service or other business activities that occurred over the internet.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if this was something that covered home businesses.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
May 21, 2012
Page 7
Mr. Tamulonis said it wouldn’t affect home businesses since it had to do with investment in property
values. If a business was conducted in a portion of a home, it would not qualify. It had to be an
investment of at least $50,000 to be eligible.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if it would protect against that type of use and protect our zoning districts.
Mr. Grimaldi said this wouldn’t impact the City’s zoning.
Mr. Tamulonis said the zoning rules would remain in place with no changes.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
RALSTON TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-06. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
Mr. Grimaldi reminded the Council of the Joint Elected Officials meeting on Thursday, May 24 with
lunch starting at 11:30am and the meeting starting at 12:00pm. The meeting would be held at the
Eugene Library.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
Mr. Cox introduced two new law clerks with the City Attorney’s Office, Devin Driver and Alex
Gavriilidis. The City Attorney’s Office had made arrangements with the University of Oregon’s Law
School to have two municipal law clerks full-time at the office. The clerks would rotate each semester
and would put in between 16 and 20 hours per week in order to get three credits each semester. The
clerks would be doing research and writing for the City Attorney’s Office. These were very bright
students and the City Attorney’s Office was very excited to be part of this program. They hoped it
would be a long-term partnership with the Law School.
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 LOKEY LABORATORY TOUR
SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, MAY 29, 2012
The City of Springfield Council met for a presentation and tour of the Lorey I. Lokey Laboratory on
the University of Oregon Campus on Tuesday, May 29, 2012 at 5:30 p.m.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors VanGordon, Moore and Woodrow. Also present were
City Manager Gino Grimaldi and City Recorder Amy Sowa.
Councilors Wylie, Ralston and Pishioneri were absent (excused).
1. University of Oregon Research, Innovation and Technology Transfer: Partnerships and Economic
Development.
The University of Oregon (UO) provides comprehensive instructional, research, and public service
programs that advance scientific and humanistic knowledge and serve the educational, cultural, and
economic needs of the local community, Oregon, the Pacific Northwest, and the nation. These
functions align closely with the City of Springfield’s economic development goals and provide
opportunities for innovative partnerships.
UO faculty and administrators provided the context for the university’s strategies around research and
innovation and provided examples of research and outreach done in Springfield.
Greg Rikhoff, Director of Community Relations, welcomed the Mayor, Councilors and staff to the
Lorey I. Lokey Laboratory. He introduced Kimberly Andrews Espy, Vice President for Research and
Innovation and Dean of the Graduate School.
Ms. Espy presented a power point presentation. She spoke regarding funding sources for science and
research at the University of Oregon. Much of the funding had helped bring in scientists who had then
stayed and lived in our community. All of the programs in Research and Innovation related to our
State bringing technology that affected our economy in a positive way.
Ms. Espy noted that some of the challenges to the program included limited space to launch new
businesses and access to some of the resources. They were working with Oregon State University
through the Governor’s Regional Solutions initiative, but were also interested in the Glenwood area.
Charles (Chuck) Williams, Executive Director of Technology Transfer Services, also presented a
power point presentation. He spoke regarding moving technology into practical uses. Part of that
included transferring the information created through the technology programs to companies. The
main component was relationships between the University, students and the community. He discussed
the Willamette Angel Conference (WAC), which was an investor conference connecting early stage
and seed businesses with angel and venture investors. Entrepreneurs and start-ups could submit a
business plan for review and coaching, ultimately vying for an investment of up to $200,000.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 29, 2012
Page 2
Mr. Williams discussed the income for licensing innovations and noted that they would like to grow
that by 15% per annum. They faced the same challenges as noted by Ms. Espy of space, access to
capital and communicating to the public.
Dave Johnson, Professor of Chemistry reiterated the importance of relationships for these programs.
The future of the universities was to prepare students for particular businesses where they could be
placed and get a job. He also spoke of the importance of making Eugene, Springfield, and Glenwood a
place where businesses wanted to locate. Sometimes, that took getting one or two businesses
established.
Chris Larson, Masters Industrial Internships Director spoke regarding the internship program. The
University started asking businesses and the community how they could help. The program was more
than just the facility, but could prepare students with the skills needed to work in local industry. They
also wanted to look to bring businesses to our area. Their program had been successful in placing
100% of the grad students with businesses. They were also looking at a similar program for
undergraduates.
Councilor Moore asked if the School of Business was part of this internship program.
Mr. Larson said it was a different program, although they had a similar process. This program was
more focused on sciences and industry.
Ellen McWhirter, Professor in Counseling and Psychology, presented a power point presentation. She
spoke regarding career development in Latino and Latina adolescents. When meeting with a group of
students from Springfield High School, they found that some of the barriers for these students in high
school and pursuing higher education included economics, parents lack of access to resources, lack of
confidence and racism. They formed the “Advocacy for Latino Achievement in School (ALAS)” a
pilot outreach program. ALAS included 19 students; 80% Mexican American, 15% Central American,
and the remainder from the Caribbean. The goals of the program were:
• Goal #1: Provide bilingual academic and homework support
• Goal #2: Provide advocacy skills training
ALAS met twice a week after school from February through June and had a very high attendance rate.
The students were very engaged and through this program their confidence was increased. The pilot
was very successful and the University hoped to expand the program to other schools, but needed
funding and a structure.
The Mayor and Council were invited to attend the Science Odyssey on September 15, 2012, which
included connections between industry and the programs. Invitations would be mailed. During this
event, students interviewed with businesses.
Councilor VanGordon asked what Springfield elected officials could do to help.
Talk about the program in the community and tell the story. Encourage collaboration and look at how
Glenwood could fit into the vision. They could also invite businesses to tour the Lab and show them
what was available, or hold a Business Appreciation Reception at the Lab.
Following the presentations, John Donovan, UO Microanalytical Facility Director, provided a tour of
the laboratory to the Mayor, Council and staff.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
May 29, 2012
Page 3
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:02 p.m.
Minutes Recorder – Amy Sowa
______________________
Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor
Attest:
____________________
Amy Sowa
City Recorder
City of Springfield
Work Session Meeting
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, JUNE 4, 2012
The City of Springfield Council met in a work session in the Jesse Maine Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, June 4, 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 Matthew Cox, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
1. Springfield Municipal Code Section 7 - Rentals.
Development and Public Works Director Len Goodwin presented the staff report on this item. On May
21st, 2012 the City Council requested a review of the amended Springfield Municipal Code Section 7 –
Rentals (7.340) to include triplex, duplex and single family rental units. Amendment to the code was
adopted by Ordinance on July 5th, 2011.
Councilor Moore asked if Springfield had a code specific to rental properties. No. She asked if other
cities had something like that.
Mr. Goodwin said other cities did have a rental code. Springfield only responded to nuisances and
other issues that affected the property.
Ms. Murdoch said Springfield had a Housing Code to cover inspections, etc.
Councilor Moore asked what a rental code would look like. She would like to see examples of what
other cities had in place. She didn’t feel like she had answers from a direct source to some of the
questions she was asked. The City and Council knew what the funds from the fee were going for, but
others didn’t. She wanted to see what a rental properties code would look like.
Mr. Goodwin said many of those types of codes related to the relationship between the landlord and
tenant, such as treatment of the tenant, etc. That was under State law, but localities could impose local
regulations as well, such as Eugene.
Councilor Ralston said he served on the Housing Policy Board. When Eugene first implemented their
rental code it was started as a way to protect tenants from landlords that didn’t keep their property up
to code. In order to fund a person to overlook that program, they needed to implement a fee. Eugene’s
fee was higher than the one implemented in Springfield.
Mayor Lundberg asked about the ordinance Eugene just repealed regarding a fee.
Ms. Murdoch said she thought it was related to the sunsetting of the ordinance.
Mr. Goodwin said he believed it involved both the fee and the language about interaction in their code.
Mr. Goodwin said it was more detailed and comprehensive. In Springfield’s code, staff would inspect
to see if tenants were responding to complaints of potential nuisances or absence of water or heat.
There would not be a specific set of provisions detailing the limits of services that needed to be
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 2
provided. Our approach had been to respond to complaints that could violate existing codes rather than
try to more thoroughly and comprehensively regulate the relationship between landlord and tenant.
The extraordinary extreme of this type of code was regulating rents and how people paid.
Councilor Pishioneri said he was supportive of Option 1 presented in the Council packet. There was
State law that covered landlord/tenant issues. Because of the way the fee was received, he did not want
to go forward with another code. He would prefer to repeal the ordinance adopted last July. For the
amount of funding that came in, it was not worth the angst. There were many people that owned a
duplex and lived in one half, and that was not a business. He was not willing to move it forward
because it was not worth the payoff.
Councilor Woodrow asked if we had an idea of how many complaints for rentals were received.
Ms. Murdoch said that was not tracked separately. They did receive a fair number, but people weren’t
expecting the City to have a rental code so may not be calling.
Councilor Woodrow said if the City did consider a rental code, she would like to see consideration for
the landlord as well as the tenants. Landlords didn’t have any recourse when property was destroyed.
She was most supportive of getting rid of the fee entirely because she felt they needed to respond to
the community. It could perhaps be revisited under a different idea or means.
Councilor Wylie said she would like to repeal the fee. She would like to set up a landlord/tenant
committee to rework the language and concept and try again after getting citizen input. Funds were
needed to cover the costs so she would like to see how that could be done. Let people be part of the
process. She didn’t feel they should give up on the whole idea, but should back step, correct our
mistakes and go forward.
Councilor Ralston said it was ill received because it was hard to relate the funds to the service. He
understood the point of those living in duplexes. There was a need and the intent was to assist with the
need. They needed to repeal the ordinance as it was, but he agreed they needed input and should revisit
it in another light. By doing that, they shouldn’t have nearly as many objections.
Councilor VanGordon said he agreed with Option 1. He asked how much it cost code enforcement to
respond to duplexes and nuisance complaints.
Ms. Murdoch said nuisance enforcement included a wide range of complaints.
Mr. Goodwin said staff hadn’t kept records broken out by type of issue.
Councilor VanGordon said if they were going to revisit this in the future, they needed to have an
understanding of the costs associated with this particular nuisance. If talking with the community
about this, they needed to be able to link the costs and the service. He agreed they needed to repeal the
ordinance and then start a discussion about this in the future.
Councilor Pishioneri said if there was a good argument of why something was being done, it would be
easier for him to support. He didn’t feel there were strong enough reasons for questions he received
about this fee. He was not convinced the fee went towards appropriate enforcement related to
landlord/tenant issues. He would like to have staff break down their time by code to track these types
of complaints. He felt time was being spent on an issue that was State regulated. He wanted to see the
ordinance repealed and the money refunded. If it was justified, it could be looked at again, but if not
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 3
we shouldn’t be looking for ways to get funding. If the City moved forward with looking at this again,
he would suggest it was done with caution.
Councilor Woodrow said many of the comments received regarding this fee stated that their duplex or
rental was an investment and not a business. It was difficult to respond to citizens regarding this issue
and the official definition. If this issue was revisited, she would like to make sure it was called
something other than a business, such as a non-occupied housing fee. That might make people more
comfortable.
Councilor Wylie said she liked the idea of having something for the landlord as well. She remembered
owning a rental in Eugene when their code came out. The mess left by the tenants far exceeded the
deposit, and she was angry she was paying $10 for a rental fee. This was about justice and equity and
should involve a discussion. There should be consequences for both landlords and tenants.
Councilor Moore noted that only about 10% of those who had paid the fee to date expressed
opposition. Her understanding was that the purpose of this fee was to not only help cover costs, but
also to get a listing of rental properties in Springfield and determine ownership. As a tenant, people
didn’t always feel they had recourse when there were issues, and 65% of owners lived outside of
Springfield. She felt there was a need other than the funding and that the City needed to have some
type of rental property code. This was passed last summer and she apologized as a councilor to the
public for not following through with information at that time. She was not in favor of returning the
funds, but would accept Council’s decision.
Councilor VanGordon said if this was revisited in the future, it would be important to understand the
costs specific for this group of people so they could explain it to the public. He would like to let it be
for now and start over with more public discussion at a later date. Renters and owners needed to be
involved in the process and they may end up coming up with a different solution.
Councilor Pishioneri said Springfield prided ourselves for being open for business and he wanted to
make sure we remained open for business. He wanted to send the message that Council did listen to
people and were willing to change course if it was the right thing to do.
Councilor Moore reiterated that there were other reasons that this was put into place besides the
funding.
Councilor Pishioneri understood the other reasons when this was brought forward, but he felt it should
be repealed.
Mayor Lundberg said when this was enacted, they were looking for a way to help fund code
enforcement and this was an option. The good outcome was that they had a good list of rentals. She
was not happy with where this was going now and she wanted to go forward with caution. This wasn’t
enacted because we had a lot of landlord/tenant issues and looking at landlord/tenant relations now
could bring more of those issues to the forefront than the City wanted to be involved with. She asked
if the City wanted to get involved in landlord/tenant issues when we were already short on funds and
resources. It was a simple concept in the beginning. Council did sound ready to make a decision
tonight.
Mr. Goodwin asked for Council direction whether or not they would like future discussions about the
property management code enforcement only, or the rental housing relationships brought forward by
Councilor Moore. At some point before they came back, staff would like more Council direction on
what they would like to discuss.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 4
Mayor Lundberg said they could move forward with a vote tonight. There were two or three layers for
future discussion. If they looked at this again, staff could bring forward a couple of options. She would
like more information on what other communities had done and why Eugene chose to relook at the
sunsetting.
Mr. Grimaldi suggested they bring this topic back later after giving this a good rest.
1. Sustainable City Year Program End of Year Summary.
Management Analyst Courtney Griesel presented the staff report on this item. She introduced Bob
Choquette who had worked with her on these projects. City Staff had been working with University of
Oregon faculty and students over the last academic year to complete work on multiple City projects as
part of the Sustainable City Year (SCY) partnership.
Ms. Griesel noted that detailed reports would be coming from all of the projects that were done over
the last year.
Mr. Choquette said from the university’s perspective, they were excited about the opportunity to
continue to work with Springfield and get students out in the community to learn by doing hands-on
work. Thirty-one different classes across ten different disciplines were involved in these projects.
Thirty-nine faculty members and 435 students were involved putting in over 59,100 hour of student
effort focused on projects and issues that were identified by Springfield. They were very excited for
the opportunity to continue this next year with additional projects.
Jen Self, a graduate student from the University of Oregon pursuing concurrent masters in community
regional planning and historic preservation, presented information on the Citywide Wayfinding Plan.
She distributed a handout outlining some of the goals and outcomes from this project. The team for
this project included three graduate students and one undergraduate student, all from the fields of
Landscape Architecture and Historic Preservation. Two faculty advisors were also involved from
Planning and Spatial Mapping. This project was identified from a report that came out in 2011 that
identified that the City needed a comprehensive wayfinding plan.
Ms. Self discussed the concept of wayfinding to help visitors and residents navigate around the city. A
conceptual plan would include a variety of tools such as signage, printed media, environmental
features such as streetscapes or well defined districts, interactive mapping and internet resources. The
primary purpose of the project was to provide the City with recommendations and tools that could be
used for a city-wide system which could improve the orientation, navigation and experience of visitors
and residents. The project supported economic development revitalization, enhanced public safety and
improved infrastructure all while preserving the home town feel of Springfield and emphasizing the
livability of the community. A large component of this project was to determine the logic of
Springfield and coherency of pattern that was recognizable to residents, but could also be translated to
visitors in an understandable way.
Ms. Self said throughout the project, the team consulted with City staff, Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT), public interest groups and a stakeholder group that was assembled by the
City to help determine the wants and needs of the community as well as the barriers for creating this
plan. They had also gathered best practices from around the country and had inventoried existing
destinations within the City. To date they had inventoried over 500 signs and over 200 destinations.
The inventory had allowed them to analyze the gaps and weaknesses that were within the City and
move forward with recommendations.
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 5
Ms. Self referred to the handout that listed some of the goals and the areas of improvement that had
been identified. As part of their recommendations for the City, the team had created a lot of maps that
had been refined by members of the community, and a list of destinations to highlight. The logic map
was intended to be used for pedestrian kiosk visitor brochures, but also to help identify the sense of
place within the zones and to highlight the amenities. Identifying the destinations to highlight would
help determine the proper treatment and saturation for wayfinding elements needed for each location.
The team was creating the wayfinding plan, and the City would look for opportunities for students in
the fall to carry this on and create design and implementation of this plan. She referred to a map that
showed the potential of what could be done and where wayfinding elements could go, what should be
included on them, and what they might look like. The team was honored to be able to work on this
project; they had a lot of fun seeing the many amenities in Springfield.
Mr. Choquette said this was one project that would be continued next year.
Ms. Griesel said they not only inventoried the signs, but created an entire GIS layer that could be
incorporated into the City’s system which was a huge help for the City.
Ms. Self said the team wanted to provide the City with usable documents and usable map layers that
could by used with existing layers.
Development and Public Works Department Director Len Goodwin spoke regarding a project he was
involved with through the Sustainable City Year program. Mr. Goodwin said the City asked the law
school students from the local government law class to look at how the City might change the
transportation system development charge (SDC) methodology to provide incentives that would
reduce SDCs for development that would be multi-modal and provide additional alternative accesses
for people. The City was going through scenario planning and this could be a way for the City to
reduce SDCs by increasing the capacity for non-vehicular traffic. The students were very creative
coming up with two basic concepts. The first was how the City might develop funding mechanisms
that might make it possible to create cash incentives. They also came up with a couple of different
ways to look at the capacity of the transportation system and using that analysis to come up with a way
that an SDC could be less if the development were located, designed or built in a certain way. It was a
novel concept and had not been tried in many places before, if any. One of the continuation projects
for next year would be to take the concepts the students came up with and try to create something that
looked like an SDC methodology. Staff was currently working on the Springfield Transportation Plan
which would produce a project list that would trigger an update of our transportation SDCs so this was
very timely for the City. They hoped they could come back to Council next year with some ideas of
how to keep SDCs from growing any larger and perhaps a way to reduce them.
Ms. Griesel said the next project was regarding the greenhouse gas inventory. Staff was equally
interested in learning how to do this as the students. The greenhouse gas inventory for local
government operations meant for city facility functions.
Shelley Deadmond, a graduate student in a program called Oregon Leadership and Sustainability,
presented information on the Greenhouse Gas Inventory (GGI). She introduced Steven Richter who
would also be presenting information on this topic. She noted the time spent by City staff gathering the
information on this topic and that the outcome was a result of the two groups partnering together. A
GGI included six gases that were identified with global warming/climate change potential. Those
gases were identified by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a collection of 4000
climate scientists. A GGI was a place most cities started when wanting to learn about their climate
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 6
impacts. It created the foundation for what would become a roadmap if the City chose to go towards
carbon neutrality (carbon emissions and equivalent).
Ms. Griesel noted that this could be a lengthy presentation which she would like to present to the
Council at a later date. There were a lot of scientific things that couldn’t be discussed during the time
constraints this evening.
Ms. Deadmond said when creating a GGI, the global warming potentials of each of the greenhouse
gases was determined. They gathered all of the different scopes of where emissions came from and
converted that to metric tons of carbon dioxide emission equivalents. Data was collected on three
scopes: 1) direct emissions (fuel combustion or power generation on site and on vehicles); 2) indirect
(such as purchasing electricity); and 3) indirect (everything else). Scope three was much higher
because the fuel that went into the trucks to go to the forest to cut down the trees to make the paper
added up to a large amount of emissions.
Ms. Griesel referred to a slide showing the City’s inventory summarized by those three scopes. She
explained the summary. This information positioned the City when going for grant dollars and with
strategic planning. There were many reasons for doing the GGI.
Ms. Deadmond said this information was the product of hundreds of hours of data gathering and
analyzing.
Steven Richter said there were a number of different components of analysis that were performed. An
example included a commute survey which asked how many miles away employees were driving,
carpooling, riding the bus, or riding their bike to work. That provided data to develop a model of costs
and benefits of certain policies such as building bike lockers or buying employee bus passes. Data was
collected on the city’s fleet, including the age and type of vehicles and how much gas was bought for
those vehicles. The City had a number of vehicles that were 10 years old that were getting close to
replacement age and this information identified recommendations for replacements. Some
recommendations included buying alternative vehicles (hybrid vehicles, electric vehicles), paying for
employee parking for people carpooling, and bus subsidies. They wanted to determine the impact and
cost of some of these policies. A number of the policies could be expensive, but grants were available
to assist. Combining grant funds with other benefits could actually reduce future operations costs. The
team also inventoried the GGI for buildings and looked at how much effort was needed to implement
the policies compared to the impact. They focused on the low effort/high impact area, such as heat
pumps. He noted that this was just a small sample of the analysis they had done and the
recommendations for the City.
Ms. Griesel said there was so much more to this and the amount of information that was gathered.
There were future steps associated with the GGI to keep it current for those grant fund opportunities.
The next presentation was on a future school.
Jeff Materresse said his team had compiled different designs for a proposed elementary school in the
Jasper Natron area. They were thankful for the opportunity to work on this project. Some of the
challenges for this site included the fact that it was to be designed for students from kindergarten
through 8th grade, for up to 650 students, and the property was slightly smaller than other elementary
school sites. Also, there was not a lot of development in the Jasper Natron area. The property was
steeply sloped and included a lot of wetlands, so the team came up with some very creative designs.
There was a lot of discussion on how to deal with the road just south of the site resulting in some
creative solutions. The focus of their design started with how education should work and designing a
classroom and then a school from that point. He referred to drawings in the power point showing
City of Springfield
Council Work Session Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 7
several different designs for the classrooms and the school. He explained each. The team tried to find
ways to separate the school into separate areas for the different ages, and also to give it a feeling of
having several smaller schools within one larger school.
Ms. Griesel displayed other pictures of other projects that were done through the Sustainable City
Year program. All of the images and projects would be in a detailed report. Having these images when
talking with citizens was a great asset. She thanked the Council for the opportunity to be part of this
project as it had been a great learning experience for them. The students had done a superb job and
delivered quality products that the City could use.
Mayor Lundberg thanked them all for attending a presenting because she understood it was near the
end of the term. Their presentation was greatly appreciated and she looked forward to the work they
would be doing in the coming year.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 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
MONDAY, JUNE 4, 2012
The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street,
Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, June 4, 2012 at 7:06 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 Mary Bridget Smith, City Recorder Amy Sowa and members of the staff.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Lundberg.
SPRINGFIELD UPBEAT
1. “If I Were Mayor Contest” Winners.
Every year, the Oregon Mayor’s Association (OMA) invited mayors across Oregon to participate in
the “If I Were Mayor” event. This year’s theme was “If I Were Mayor, After School Would Be . . . “.
Mayor Lundberg chose to host this competition this year to acknowledge the importance of after
school programs for the youth in our community. Students were invited to participate in the following
three categories: Elementary School Poster, Middle School Essay and/or Video/PowerPoint, and High
School or College Video/PowerPoint. Nearly twenty entries were submitted from the first two
categories. There were no entries for the High School/College category.
Winners from the local level would be entered in the statewide OMA contest. Statewide winners
would be notified along with their mayor in mid-June. The winners and their parents would then be
invited to an Oregon Mayors Association Annual Conference luncheon in Florence at the Driftwood
Shores Resort on Saturday, July 28, 2012, to be recognized and receive their prizes. The State winner
would receive a laptop.
Local winners chosen by Mayor Lundberg were:
• Amaya Fotta, 4th Grader, Guy Lee Elementary
l • Nicole Wellentin, 6th Grader, Agnes Stewart Middle Schoo
Mayor Lundberg said she was delighted with all of the entries that were submitted. She went to the
schools and presented gift certificates to the winners and now wanted to honor them publicly.
Mayor Lundberg noted that both winners had presented some very creative ideas for after school
activities. She presented the winners with letters of congratulations.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 2
2. Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Award Presentation.
Finance Director Bob Duey presented this item. The Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in
Finance Reporting had been awarded to the City of Springfield by the Government Finance Officers
Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) for its comprehensive annual financial report
(CAFR). The Certificate of Achievement was the highest form of recognition in the area of
governmental accounting and financial reporting and its attainment represented a significant
accomplishment by a government and its management. The CAFR had been judged by an impartial
panel to meet the high standards of the program including demonstrating a constructive “spirit of full
disclosure” to clearly communicate its financial story and motivate potential users and user groups to
read the CAFR.
Mr. Duey introduced Nathan Bell who along with his staff were responsible for the financial reporting
of the City. The report was also to be educational so citizens could learn how their City was doing
financially. The annual audit was performed by outside Certified Public Accountants (CPA) using
information as prepared in the annual financial statements to look at how the City had done over the
past year. Nathan and his staff were responsible to make sure the internal controls had integrity and
were above board. He read from the award and presented it to Mr. Bell.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Claims
2. Minutes
a. May 21, 2012 – Work Session
3. Resolutions
4. Ordinances
5. Other Routine Matters
a. Approval of Liquor License Endorsement for Cottage House Restaurant and Lounge Located
at 1875 Mohawk Street, Springfield, Oregon.
b. Approval of Liquor License Endorsement for Las Ranas Taqueria Located at 321 Main Street,
Springfield, Oregon.
c. Approval of Liquor License Endorsement for B Lucky Bistro Located at 528 Harlow Road,
Springfield, Oregon.
d. Award the Subject Contract to Wildish Construction Co. in the Amount of $1,831,721.00 for
Project P21037; 10th and N Sewer Upgrade - Phase 1.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
RALSTON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A
VOTE OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
ITEMS REMOVED
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 3
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.
1. Supplemental Budget Resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 2012-07 - A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING RESOURCES AND
REQUIREMENTS IN THE FOLLOWING FUNDS: GENERAL, STREET, SPECIAL
REVENUE, TRANSIENT ROOM TAX, POLICE LOCAL OPTION LEVY, REGIONAL
WASTEWATER REVENUE BOND CAPITAL PROJECT, REGIONAL WASTEWATER
CAPITAL, SDC LOCAL STORM IMPROVEMENT, SDC LOCAL STORM
REIMBURSEMENT, SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT SDC, SANITARY SEWER
IMPROVEMENT SDC, SDC TRANSPORTATION REIMBURSEMENT, SDC
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT, LOCAL WASTEWATER OPERATIONS,
REGIONAL WASTEWATER, STORM DRAINAGE OPERATIONS, BOOTH-KELLY, AND
INSURANCE FUNDS.
Finance Director Bob Duey presented the staff report on this item. At various times during the fiscal
year the Council was requested to make adjustments to the annual budget to reflect needed changes in
planned activities, to recognize new revenues, or to make other required adjustments. These
adjustments to resources and requirements changed the current budget and were processed through
supplemental budget requests scheduled by the Finance Department on an annual basis.
This was the last of three scheduled FY12 supplemental budget requests to come before Council. The
supplemental budget being presented included adjusting resources and requirements in the General,
Street, Special Revenue, Transient Room Tax, Police Local Option Levy, Regional Wastewater
Revenue Bond Capital Project, Regional Wastewater Capital, SDC Local Storm Improvement, SDC
Local Storm Reimbursement, Sanitary Sewer Reimbursement SDC, Sanitary Sewer Improvement
SDC, SDC Transportation Reimbursement, SDC Transportation Improvement, Local Wastewater
Operations, Regional Wastewater, Storm Drainage Operations, Booth-Kelly, and Insurance Funds.
The City Council was asked to approve the attached Supplemental Budget Resolution.
The overall financial impact of the Supplemental Budget Resolution was to decrease Reserves
($569,444), increase Interfund Transfers ($202,811), increase Debt Service ($640), increase Statutory
Payments ($310,000) and increase Operating Expenses ($422,526). These were offset by Grants
($256,700), and new revenue ($109,833)
Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing.
No one appeared to speak.
Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
RALSTON TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2012-07. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE
OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 4
2. Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Project, Phase I (Springfield File Nos. TYP411-0006,
TYP411-00005, TYP311-00001, TYP411-00007, Lane County File No. PA 11-5489).
ORDINANCE NO. 1 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD
METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN DIAGRAM, THE GLENWOOD REFINEMENT
PLAN DIAGRAM AND TEXT, THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND THE
SPRINGFIELD ZONING MAP, AND ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
City planners Gary Karp and Molly Markarian presented the staff report on this item. The Springfield
and Lane County Planning Commissions conducted a public hearing on October 18, 2011 and
continued the hearing on December 20, 2011. Based on the record and the public testimony received,
the Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions voted unanimously to recommend adoption
of the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update project proposal with 30 text modifications.
On January 23, 2012, the Springfield City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners
conducted a work session on the proposed amendments. Issues raised by Councilors and
Commissioners at that work session were addressed during the staff presentation at the April 2, 2012
joint public hearing.
Following the April 2, 2012 joint public hearing and Council-Board deliberations, the Council elected
to close the record and requested a work session to discuss five issues raised during the public hearing.
At the May 14, 2012 work session, Council directed staff to prepare an additional work session
discussion on drive-through restrictions in Subarea D. Council also directed staff to prepare notice for
and schedule a June 4, 2012 public hearing on the limited topic of permitting student housing within
the Office Mixed-Use designation in Subarea C. On May 18, 2012, notice was mailed to property
owners of Subarea C and those who testified at the April 2, 2012 public hearing. At the May 21, 2012
work session, Council clarified the definition of student housing and directed staff to permit drive-
through facilities in Subarea D in certain circumstances. The Council will hold a third reading with
the option to adopt the Glenwood Phase 1 ordinance on June 18, 2012.
The Lane County Board of Commissioners had a first reading on the amendments on March 14, 2012.
At the April 2, 2012 joint public hearing, the Commission chose to delay their decision until the
Council action and moved to leave their record open until June 20, 2012. Following the May 14, 2012
Council work session, the Commissioners elected to hold a public hearing on June 20, 2012.
Mayor Lundberg opened the public hearing for limited comments specifically about student housing in
Subarea C. She reminded the audience that the record was closed for all other comments.
1. Yoon Shin, Eugene, OR. Mr. Shin said he understood the other issue was drive-throughs in
Subarea D.
City Attorney Mary Bridget Smith said that was not an issue for tonight’s public hearing. She
said the purpose of tonight’s hearing was to only address student housing in Subarea C;
however, Mr. Shin could speak and then the Council would need to note for the record
whether or not his testimony would be considered.
Mr. Shin said he owned about 14.6 acres of property at 4531 and 4552 Franklin Boulevard in
Subarea D. His attorney had submitted a letter to staff this afternoon which was distributed to
the Mayor and Council by the City Recorder. The letter addressed some obvious legal
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 5
shortcomings. If the Plan had to be appealed, those would be the basis for a remand. His
parcel was currently designated as Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family Residential Mixed-
Use. This designation with a wide range of development potentials was a major reason why
this property was an attractive investment. The proposed plan to re-designate this area to
Employment Mixed-Use would severely limit the development possibilities of this beautiful
parcel. He asked that the plan designation for the 11 acres of riverfront parcel be left alone
with no changes. Keeping the current designation did not require any new notices to the
public. If the designation remained unchanged on his land, his investment plans would be
secure. It would also benefit the City by allowing the City to meet its obligation of additional
High Density Residential inventory as required by Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan.
2. Zack Pardo, Springfield, Oregon. Mr. Pardo said he was a resident and property owner in
Glenwood, and also a member of the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC). He spoke
regarding student housing. This type of development established a transient population of
substantial size in the area. If one of the goals of the nodal development was a stable,
functional neighborhood, than these uses would be detrimental, especially if they were High
Density. Liquefaction was a condition which could be brought about by saturation of certain
soil types with minor earthquake activity. When this occurred, the soil could actually become
liquid. Multi-story buildings would actually sink into the ground. He noted that this area
would be subject to that type of geological activity.
Ms. Smith said that before closing the record and the hearing, she wanted it noted that one
letter from Bill Kloos dealing with Mr. Shin’s property and one email had been received that
were not on topic of the Student Housing. She asked the Council to exclude those from the
record as not being relevant to the purpose of tonight’s hearing.
Mayor Lundberg closed the public hearing and the record. She noted that no action was being taken on
this item tonight. A final reading a possible action was scheduled for June 18, 2012.
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
1. Mary Salinas, Springfield, Oregon. Ms. Salinas said she was a spokesperson for the homeless
and lived in Ward 1 of Springfield. She said she would like to continue to come before
Council to convince them to see the homeless problem from her perspective. She had been
speaking for the homeless for 13 years. She was 50 when she became homeless following a
series of problems which ended in a broken foot and becoming homeless. She discussed the
difficulty in dealing with homelessness. She was homeless for about 2 ½ years in Grand
Junction, Colorado and had been speaking for the homeless every since. Because of her work
in Grand Junction, they now had a homeless shelter, a soup kitchen and a building full of free
clothes and household items. She continued her work for the homeless when she moved to the
Eugene/Springfield area four years ago. She would be coming back as her personal goal was
to bring the homeless in across the United States. She had been interviewed during the Occupy
Eugene event and was televised repeatedly. She had 2 degrees and was intense about children.
She noted that an encyclopedia on social work in the Library said just what she was saying.
She thanked the Mayor and Council and noted that the Council meeting was a more intimate
situation than in Eugene.
COUNCIL RESPONSE
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 6
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
BIDS
ORDINANCES
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL
1. Committee Appointments
2. Business from Council
a. Committee Reports
b. Other Business-
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY MANAGER
1. Springfield Municipal Code Section 7 - Rentals.
ORDINANCE NO. 6277 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL
CODE, SECTION 7 “RENTALS”, SECTION 7.340, “DEFINITION” AND DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY.
Development and Public Works Department Director Len Goodwin presented the staff report on this
item. On May 21st, 2012 the City Council requested a review of the amended Springfield Municipal
Code Section 7 – Rentals (7.340) to include triplex, duplex and single family rental units. Amendment
to the code was adopted by Ordinance on July 5th, 2011.
Concerns were raised during the work session on the rental licensing fee adopted July of 2011. During
the work session, Council discussed repealing that ordinance. Staff had prepared a draft ordinance of
repeal which was included in the agenda packet. This ordinance included an emergency clause. If
Council chose to adopt this ordinance, it would become effective immediately and create an obligation
for City staff to return all of the fees collected to date.
Councilor Pishioneri asked if the ordinance before them this evening would take things back to where
they were in July 2011.
Mr. Goodwin said it would be as if the first ordinance never existed.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
WOODROW TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 6277. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE
OF 6 FOR AND 0 AGAINST.
BUSINESS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
ADJOURNMENT
City of Springfield
Council Regular Meeting Minutes
June 4, 2012
Page 7
The meeting was adjourned 7:32 p.m.
Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa
______________________
Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor
Attest:
____________________
City Recorder
City of Springfield
Regular Meeting
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD
MONDAY, JUNE 11, 2012
The City of Springfield Council met in regular session in the Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth
Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Monday, June 11, 2012 at 5:30 p.m., with Mayor Lundberg
presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Lundberg and Councilors Pishioneri, VanGordon, Moore, Ralston and
Woodrow. Also present were City Manager Gino Grimaldi, Assistant City Manager Jeff Towery,
City Attorney Joe Leahy, City Recorder Amy Sowa, and members of the staff.
Councilor Wylie was absent (excused).
1. Primary Election Report of Board of Canvassers and Proclamation.
City Attorney Joe Leahy presented the staff report on this item. Official results from the May 15,
2012 Primary Election were received from Lane County Elections. The City Attorney forwarded
for City Council approval, the Report of Board of Canvassers and Proclamation for the May 15,
2012 Primary Election for the election of Springfield Mayor and Springfield City Council
positions for Ward 1, Ward 3, Ward 4 and Ward 6.
This action endorsed and authorized the election results for the City.
IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR PISHIONERI WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILOR
RALSTON TO APPROVE THE MAY 15, 2012 PRIMARY ELECTION REPORT OF
BOARD OF CANVASSERS AND PROCLAMATION FOR THE ELECTION FOR
SPRINGFIELD MAYOR AND SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL POSITIONS FOR
WARD 1, WARD 3, WARD 4 AND WARD 6. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE
OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST (1 ABSENT – WYLIE).
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:33 p.m.
Minutes Recorder Amy Sowa
______________________
Christine L. Lundberg
Mayor
Attest:
____________________
City Recorder