Loading...
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