Springfield City Council — February 14, 2022

0:06 I'm going to call the Springfield City Council work session to order with roll call. Mayor Van Gordon. Here. Uh Council Pitts. Here. Councilor Melo. Here. Councilor Rodley. Here. Councilor Stearns. Here. Councilor Woodrow. Here. Councilor Chin-Gary. Here. Thank you. All right. We have one item tonight, which is the housing and homelessness project list update with Aaron. Hello Aaron. Hi. Uh good evening Mayor Council. Glad to be here with you on Oregon's birthday. Um I'm here tonight

0:51 seeking direction from you all on a list of potential projects in Springfield to address affordable housing and homelessness. Recently as you may know the state legislature and our local legislators, Representative Lively and Senator Beyer, have made allocations toward projects in Springfield to address affordable housing and homelessness. So this is a mix of state general funds, federal ARPA funds, and each carry a different uh set of restrictions and purpose. Uh but the city does have a role in guiding these funds toward given projects. Um some of these These are Sorry, these are one-time funds, but some of them can be used over a number of years. Um I would just like to point out given that we have other federal funds, CDBG

1:37 and HOME, that we still are receiving to address social service needs and affordable housing. Um these are projects on top of those additional projects and uh staff time is limited in how much uh we can put effort into, which is why we are seeking your guidance. Um we've assembled the list of projects in your packet tonight um from known efforts that are ready to proceed. Many of the projects listed here actually are not eligible for federal funds CDBG or for a variety of reasons. There are of course other efforts happening to address affordable housing and homelessness, but in many cases those projects either are already being funded through CDBG, are being funded through the county, or will come in later

2:24 through a request for proposals. Um so tonight um I really just want to hear from you all on the list we've put together um on where we should focus your efforts or our efforts. Um And a couple questions I guess to guide that. Um how does the list look? Um is there anything on the list um that a majority of you would like to not see move forward? Um and is everything on the list? So um I'll just take notes. I'll just add again we're just getting guidance tonight. I'll be coming back to you during a work session to sort of sift through the matching between funding sources and projects. Um but we can however you want to take tonight.

3:09 So Erin, could you clarify um about this This is This list is sort of all came from sort of all the all the different conversations that people have either called you about or saying like work that we've known about in the last couple of years. Could you tell us a little bit about a little bit more about the source of the projects on this list and how much vetting's been into it? Sure. Um so the um I would say yes, some of these projects we've actually seen come through the CDBG RFP um but for a variety of reasons are not eligible um based on some of those restrictions and sort of a cap we spend toward social services, for example. Um some of these um

3:57 are actually like the manufactured home park for Lindale Lane um or um sort of answer These are specific projects that were called out either through the state legislative funding or um Representative Lively um specifically his allocation through ARPA funds. Um some of have been like the ADU incentive program that we've kind of as staff when Council was directing us to help incentivize ADUs sort of came up then, but we didn't really have a funding source um that we could utilize for that project. And then others sort of came out of where the emergency operations center sort of stepped up when COVID happened. So to provide downtown

4:43 porta-potties um or help support CAHOOTS. Um those are projects that those funding sources went away, but here's another funding opportunity to continue those efforts. Um So they've kind of all been in and around the city um but we get haven't been able to figure out how to really fund them or continue, and that's a question for you all if if you want to. Okay. Merrilee. Yes, I was curious about the the vetting process. Um some of these on here I I know have not met requirements in the past. Um I have I'll start right out by saying that my biggest issue with this my biggest feeling about this is um these

5:28 are one-time funds. And I look at the where we can go with this is one-time expense to meet meet those meet those issue those projects with a one-time expense um as opposed to ongoing support or the So the first thing that I look at when I look at these projects is okay, what if is there something there that can take money right now and use it as opposed to then turning around and saying, "Okay, now we need four more years of money from you now that we've gotten started." So, I I'm looking at this is one-time funds for us to to allocate to a one-time expense because we we're not

6:15 sitting in a We have money right now, but we're not sitting in a situation where we can automatically apply two or three staff people to help with the sustainability, you know, and that kind of thing. So, if there's a project there that can um manage with a one-time support, one-time expense support, that is where where for the most part I'm drawing a line and until you look at something like Kahoots, which is something that we have already dedicated ourselves to making sure that we have help with with that ongoing program because it's already established. But, it's a one-time it would be a one-time donation from this particular funding that we have. But, it's I just

7:02 I'm very leery of getting money into something that then it's it meets expectations of people and then all of a sudden it's not going to be there because the money's not there to sustain it. So, I to me that's that's a defining issue. Um and uh along with that um I I think uh my my mind is I was looking at this material today looking at conversations with myself and a couple other people is is there a reason or have we considered going out for RFPs for this money? Well, Us as the city?

7:47 Yeah. I mean, is there is there a reason why or why not um that we could go out for RFPs for this for this one? I mean, I realize they're not all of them together, but is there a reason why we could or could not do that? I would say for I'm looking at this list, none of these, perhaps except for the downtown porta potties and the Kahoots van, um none of these would fall within the city's purview of what we would administer. We'd help guide a project, perhaps, but we would not be on the end of, let's say, managing the project. And so, it's I guess many of these are actually we're leaving them up to the developer or the agency themselves to go out and find

8:34 um money. And I guess we we are the grant source in this case. Um if that And there hasn't been other sources that they've been able to find um is why I think some of these are still not fully funded. So, this could not be administered the same way we do CDBG. I mean, not I'm not saying they're they're not equal, I mean, as far as qualifications and and what is necessary, but uh we do RFPs for CDBG money. And people come and say, "This is our project. This is how we've got it set up, and this is the grant money we'd like to have." Um Okay, maybe I misunderstood. Sorry. Um I think what is tricky here is that there are four different funding sources that we are

9:19 Right. dealing with. So, that's why we I guess we wanted to vet it by you all first in that sense. Um But we can certainly think about that. Okay. I I realize that the the the 3 million for the manufactured home park is pretty almost pretty much specified, you know, set aside for that for that issue alone. But I was just thinking with some of the others um having an outline and a and a set up procedure for what somebody wants to do with a project how they're going to staff it, how they're going to do it as far as being able to meet the the needs and the requirements for the for this one-time funding.

10:07 Okay. That's me That's it for now. Corey. Thank you. Um and I appreciate hearing Council Woodrow's perspective. And I'm going to take just a little time cuz I have opinions and a little bit of a different perspective because I I do understand that this is one-time funding and as I'm thinking about all of these different funds that are coming in and all of these ways, this we we still have to look for other funding. So this isn't the end. Um so I see this as also an opportunity to invest in some of these projects that have just been we've sort of been pushing them to the side. And so it's an opportunity to invest and to potentially leverage because we're still going to be looking for other funding as it comes available. And by having

10:52 projects that are are basically shovel ready or that we're already moving on is going to increase our opportunities for attracting additional funding. That's my opinion about it. So and then I just want to go because I scribbled on my pages cuz I do have some things that I think that are important. Um I think really getting sort of digging into um the shelter for the unhoused, one of the things I reached out to Aaron in advance and asked the mayor when we were chatting about it is, you know, investing in the Ebert Methodist Church and taking care of the sprinklers. That's a congregation that has, you know, really supported the unhoused and was available as an Egan warming site. And it would be great if we could dig into that. And looking at you know at the shelters,

11:37 you know, what what do what can we do so that we're not every year looking at how to shelter the unhoused and how do we invest in those folks who are willing to do that work and give them the opportunity to leverage that support into finding other funding. I also a few of these are around land and properties and I do think that we could invest in buying land and more land banks is going to increase. Again, it's going to give us a little bit of a leverage and we can throw the thing that we can do is if we don't have land, we can throw those into those RFP processes and we can add that if we're going out looking to attract some partners who want to build affordable housing. If we've got land to offer to that and then they're able to to leverage that into

12:23 funding for building their projects. Um I also just some of the things I starred were the S Street co-op. I think we already leaned into doing some creative housing in this way and I'd love to see us just continue to just diversify the affordable funding. And then I know or the fund the diversify the affordable housing in the different ways that we do it. And then well there isn't a price to it to both of these. The and I wasn't here for the ADU duplex incentive program. I think that's awesome and probably super timely and would love to see us figure out how to support that. And again, it may be that we can just find some ways to incentivize that.

13:08 Um and then there isn't a price to the resource for homeless families, but that's another hole that I think if there's a way for us to partner and help support that cuz it it like you know, counselor Woodrow said it may be one time because these are one-time funds, but is there a way for us to just really sort of make a dent in building the infrastructure so that we can move people out of that precariousness. That's all I have to say for now, but I might be back. We will stay tuned. Okay, thank you. Leonard. Thank you. So, I agree with Councillor Woodrow about the one-time funds. I mean, they it's a fact that it is a one-time fund. So, in that spirit, I wanted to revisit in our response to an RFP that we had about 2 years ago

13:55 that would create a combination permanent Egan site and a resource center for the unhoused at the Memorial Building at 799 A Street. I would love to devote whatever money it took to secure that from the the CEDA, which is the current owner of the property. And I I know we have a certain amount of sway as council on what CEDA decides. So, it seems like it's a perfect solution in a lot of ways. Um So, the the value of a resource center would be to provide vocational training, possibly transition to housing for for the unhoused. And

14:40 if we could have a combination Egan site and a resource center there, it would also potentially solve the problem of the the porta-potties and the I I think the Lou is the name of the product the project number 12. It would be a potential site for that as well. So, with any money left over, I think it was in the neighborhood of 700-800 K for the Memorial Building. I I'd love to see number six, which is the mobile home park that Representative Lively was backing. Number 10, the Kahoots van. And number 12, the 225 uh uh

15:25 uh the the 225 for the public toilets if they weren't already financed in the purses in the purchase of the uh the memorial building. I as an observation, I I'm almost done here. Um I think that if we were to adopt the memorial building as an Eagan site, I think it would have the uh approval of the pastor of Eagard um who's uh Reverend June Fathergill. I am I'm I'm pretty sure that she would back that uh back that plan. That's all I got. Thank you. Joe.

16:10 Thank you very much. Well, um Aaron, you ready? I'm just going to go out right down the list and you can and then and I think that would be much easier for you instead of bouncing around, so I'm going to go down from from 1 to 16. Okay. Okay, here we go. Number one, um on the Eagan Center, it's I I'm mostly curious as to the applicability of the funding source for something like that. Um I would think that some that type of ask would be best with a CDBG dollars if that makes any sense. Maybe not applicable, I'm not sure. Yeah, great question. I mean, in theory, the intent of the CDBG program is certainly to address the population that's being served, but the nature of um Eagard as a religious site is

16:57 precluding the federal funds from being combined there. Yeah, I forgot all about that element. So, yeah. So, um I'm not completely uh opposed to that, but I and I know that there's mention of the memorial building and I am a completely opposed to use of the memorial building for that. And that I won't support that in the future at all because uh we've got a very large project right across the street that we've already talked about. We've already basically have said multiple times that that memorial memorial building is is not in equation. And I know it's got interest and keeps popping up, but I know that in meetings before, someone correct me if I'm wrong, that that is off the table. So, uh going on down to number two is that

17:43 I can't support two, which is tied into three, because it's got some pretty significant ongoing costs, and these are one-time dollars. This is a This is not a one-time ask. So, I can't support either one of those. What If we supported two, then it would tie That would tie us into number three, and if we didn't go with number three, then they would have no funding for that, so therefore it'd be a waste of money. Uh number four, I I'm not opposed to it. Uh number five, I'm also not opposed to it. I'm not saying that I am sold on both of them, but but I'm not I'm not going to fight, right? Um number six is that I do support that, but it it's um I'm kind of curious. I would kind of base my support as to, okay, who's going to end up with or who's going to end up owning that.

18:29 So, that and you know, if if we end up owning it or who has control of it, there's going to be some ongoing associated costs and a commitment, maybe a long-term commitment from the city that I'm not interested. I can answer that. Um the city would not end up opening owning that. The city That would be Right now, the partner the nonprofit that's expressed interest that came out of the Oregon Solutions project was St. Vincent de Paul. Um so, they would be a nonprofit in this case that um would be owning the land, owning the park, managing it, um targeting long residence, yeah. We would be the But that's that's not going to Obviously, it can't go to private individual. It's going to have to go to an organization that is has to be nonprofit, correct?

19:14 Yes, under the legislation, yes. Okay, then I don't see a I don't see me um falling on the sword for that. I mean, but okay. Uh number seven, I can't support um because we don't have anything identified. It's lacking information, so therefore I can't support something I don't have enough information on. Um number eight, I do support it. It makes sense to me. Number nine, I support the concept, but I would like to have numbers, something that provide more information to make me more comfortable to support it. So, I'm I'm not leaning I'm I'm not a not opposed, but I'm more more supportive, but I would have to oppose it unless we got some more numbers. Um number 10, I support. Number 11,

19:59 um I'm kind of wondering if it's a solution to a problem we may not have. So, I'm not sure. I would have to I would have to uh look at the information that supports the request. And let's see where my number 12 number 12, um I can support that based on a commitment on the regarding regarding the ongoing cost. Um number 13, I don't oppose, but that's a but seems like that is a county driven project and it's not a Springfield city project. Seems like that is in the county's wheelhouse. And that's something that they should be coming to us saying, "Okay, we found some land, you know, this is what we want to do there and let's work together to see how

20:46 we can get to yes." But as far as us making any investments in that, that seems like that's completely out of our wheelhouse. And that's that that falls on the county's um shoulders in my mind. So, I guess I could say I oppose it at this point. Um so, number 14, um I don't oppose it, but it's based on a lack of information, so I could support it if provided additional information. Um, 15 I do support that except that it that I believe that it should be in in their in their own wheelhouse and not ours. If that makes sense. Can you clarify? Yes, I can. So, um it seems like I should say I should write in a county wheelhouse, not our

21:33 wheelhouse. I know that the county has programs to assist with sub sub bills, water bills, trash bills. I know that for a fact. And county has assisted Springfield citizens with that. And I'm trying to figure out what it why are we waiting in that puddle when when that should be coming also from the county. Two different, you know, it's like duplication of services, which means a waste of of resources and staff time. And then, uh number 16, uh I'm not totally sure on uh where I am with that. Um Mostly is it okay, so if we're helping to pay for some property and people live on that property and it's and so who does that property go to if it's paid

22:18 for? I mean, is it is it going to be given to each a percentage given to each individual's land I guess renter or leaser, lessee. It looks Wait. Yeah, no, that's a good question. So, um and I'm going to look to Tom's shadow um to pipe in um on specifics, but um my understanding is that Casa of Oregon has helped the residents buy the park, um but they have a bridge loan and they're working toward a permanent loan and I'm forgetting how large this permanent loan is, but this is to help pay down the permanent loan that would sort of slightly reduce the monthly cost that each of these residents are paying toward that loan. If that makes sense. I I yeah, I guess I'm getting a process

23:03 but I'm wondering why we why are we involved in that? Oh yeah, sorry. Representative Langworthy asked Yeah, or for this in in his um Yeah, I I get John asking for that but then so why is John weighing in on Springfield business or city business? If he wants to keep it at the state level then go for it. So I guess his projects have been sort of are needing to come through the city for our I don't know if approval is the right word and it's an agreement between the city and the Department of Administrative Services. If that makes sense. That's the process that was chosen. So Well, if if it's just for us as a pass-through agency, then I don't know how I would oppose it or should oppose it. Okay. So Okay. But if it's just a pass-through but if it's requiring us to do any

23:48 administrative work on it or any resource drain or anything like that, then then I'm not so sure. I would like I would like to know more because I don't want someone outside of our organization committing our organization to anything. And I guess that's the last on the list. How's that? It's quick. There you go. All right, Damian. Evening. So I mean I personally think if we have the resources we'll love to support all these but when I think about continuity and self-sustainability, it seems like a lot of these, you know, focusing on housing. And I know it might not necessarily be our role to do this but you know, how do we

24:37 provide that initial support for our citizens but then provide them with some type of skills or some type of resources to be able to you know, provide for themselves. I know it's you know, I mean can we potentially partner with Langworthy first partnership? I know a lot of these folks, you know, have skills that we you You and it's one thing that to have a house, and I know that's you know, the first need, but you know, to me it just seems that there could be something done with other organizations to prevent potentially provide skills uh for people so they can, you know, be self-sustaining. Two, I'm one of one of the the things in there talks about, you know, students within the Springfield school district, which I mean, I'm all about supporting youth

25:23 sometimes more so than adults, but I'm curious what role will the Springfield school board play in this, and have are they even a part of this, or have we reached out to them, or all that stuff? Uh actually, I do have one more point. There's another point where it talks about, you know, uh providing funds for people to build on their land, but just think about some of the emails that I've received, not necessarily directed to me, about how people, I mean, pretty much saying they don't want certain types of folks in their in in their neighborhood, and if there's nothing done to prevent discrimination, I can see that being like seriously problematic. And so, I mean, just overall, those are the three things that

26:09 when I look at all of them, you know, I want uh our citizens to be self-sustaining, meaning that we provide them with some type of skills, whether it's us or some other organization, or a group of organizations. I want our kids be taken care of, but how uh are we work with Springfield school board? I mean, I know they got a equity director or coordinator, whatever, you know, how can we work with them cuz it is this is a diversity and equity issue. Uh then three, um uh I fear some type of discrimination if we provide certain citizens who have the cultural capital to even build I mean, excuse me, capital and cultural capital to even build uh some type of duplex or something on their property. I can see

26:54 some uh some discriminatory practices which and ultimately will end up falling back on us because we provided that funds. I know we like to say that, you know, that that's that won't be the case, but I mean, like there's certain areas of Springfield where certain people wouldn't even think about living. And so, based on safety. And so, if Yeah, I'm I'm done. All right. So, I'm looking at this Steve, are you Well, I'll just Am I on? Okay. Uh I'll just go through I want to kind of go through the whole list, but I'll go through the ones that I I like. And that's the Egan Warming Warming Site at the Methodist Church. That would take care of a couple of

27:40 things. Plus get make it legal for for us to use it for that. Uh next one is the uh F Street Co-op Land Trust. It's built 14 suites as a housing co-op. That's a big deal. And people can buy into those and there'd be ownership going on. And Kuhut's back up van. I don't care what you say. That Kuhut's is saving us a lot of problems out there in the streets. And I want to make sure that we support them the best we can. Uh downtown porta-potties. I mentioned something the other day that the reason we have problems with bathrooms downtown is because we don't have service stations anymore. That's where we used to That's where we always went. We don't

28:25 have that. Uh I'd like to see the the temporary ones for now. Some They don't like to look at them, but maybe we can build something around it to make it not look so bad. Uh 225,000 for a permanent one. That's a lot of money. And uh Let's help fund low-income residents with water trash service. I think that's a pretty important deal. So, those are the ones that that stand out for me. All right, I'm going to jump in and then I'll let I'll let Leonard go. Um I like the Egan Warming Center um for at Ebert Memorial. I know that that has been an ask for a while to find you

29:10 know, an understanding that we need to find uh the Egan Warming Center a permanent home. And I know that we've seen some some uh community conversations about whether or not we want to make that in the Memorial building. Like we've we've discussed this a couple of times, right? Like I think our ultimate vision is to redevelop the Memorial building site and moving and investing in a in a permanent home will take a lot of work off of everybody's plate to you know, every freezing season we're looking for a permanent site for the Egan Warming Center. Um one question I do have Aaron is if we invest in that church, right? And I know June's sitting here in the crowd right now, but um is there are they committing to host

29:55 because we're providing dollars? Is there a commitment that they that they have to host uh an Egan Warming site a certain amount of time or is that something to sort of be sorted out in the long term? Be sorted out in the long I mean, before it happened I guess we'd sort it out. Um I think that would be the hope um that we could invest in that um and I don't I think we could try and figure out what the church what a reasonable commitment is if it's 5 years or you know, whatever that is. I know um they could certainly be able to offer other programming if the building was sprinkled too. And so, I'd like to think there's a a benefit to both of us. Um but certainly at minimum to the city to be able to have a permanent site. So, um I I don't know how my apologies to June. I don't know how of um

30:41 the church works. Is there a vote Is there a vote? Um so I've I've talked to one person as well as June who's expressed support for the project, but um probably getting that formal um sort of support and approval from the board to do this and then return sort of service in Egan site. Um Yeah, I can certainly look to see that if that's the case. Yeah, and yeah, okay. So that's one of the big questions that I have, but I really want to make sure that we're moving towards a permanent Egan home and then a lot of clarity around what we talked about with the memorial building is essentially, you know, that that that's a redevelopment site. We That's what we bought that Well, our friends over at Cedar bought that building for the long term. Um the other couple of ones that I do

31:26 want to talk about um I don't know I guess what's the like Anne's Heart's appeared a couple of times. Is it on the county's project list as well? Is it Is it sort of It's not on the county's list. It came out of Lively's list. So Lively had put buying and um sort of at least buying a house for Anne's Heart was on his legislative list. Okay. And I've talked to the county and there's a little bit of a haze in terms of like what how that process works in terms of ongoing support knowing that there are so many projects in the region right now that are being put forward. So I think that's a bigger conversation with the county is what those funds are available to projects and how does a new shelter essentially get funding? Like how do we

32:13 How do we know about that? Um Is there funding available? Is it first come, first serve? Um So this is where you know, I don't Anne's Heart has certainly identified Carry It Forward as a um partner in in being present in the house and providing case management and ongoing support. And the recent projection is 300,000 a year. I don't know that the county's going to get to a place where they can answer that right of way, which is why um Given Lively's sort of putting forward the money to buy the house, um staff wanted to throw this in. It is a possibility if you wanted to sort of like leverage that and invest in that sense, you could do it. Um there's an option. You don't have to. We could buy the

32:58 funds and leave it up to, you know, certainly Reverend June as part of Ensart has said, "If we had a building, we can do so so much more to fundraise versus fundraise based on a theoretical." So, you you could sort of, like I said, use Lively's funds to help them buy it and then sort of leave them to um sort of fundraise and and find a source on their own. Okay. Uh that makes sense. Um so that going down to four and five, right? Like those really jump out to me. Um the the F Street Co-op is the the F Street version of the C Street Co-op, but like from a price point perspective, we're buying into a homeownership model that's been historically what we've supported as a community and at a at a very very like a very very low uh a low price point.

33:45 Um like the manufactured home looks good, right? We that's separate stand-alone money and the other couple that I wanted to pull out, the Kahoots van, I would hope that we could all head nod and just ask the staff to program that money, right? Like, you know, walking out of this meeting today. Um because if they if we need to have a replacement van available, like we need to have a replacement van available. Um and then between the two, I I think I'm with Joe on number 12, right? About the downtown lofts that I I'm interested in the idea. I think it could make a lot of sense. I'm hearing a lot of support around the table for it, but I think we would have to kind of just know a little bit more to be 100% sure about what that investment looks like.

34:31 And then um, the mental health and behavioral health center, I know that there's another community group that was talking about an another mental health center out in Thurston. Um, to me, this is a really good project for the county to drive. Um, and if they have a like from from their perspective, but you know, if we could connect them with the other group that's wanting to do mental health work, right? Like I think I think they could uh they could potentially work together there. Um, and the last one, 15, so I read that is a I read that one as a donation specifically to CCS to fund those reimbursement programs. Is that Am I Am I reading that correctly?

35:16 Yeah, so my understanding is that CCS receives funding from both sub and the county to run either project share as it's called or another version of sort of helping with utility payments or other payments. When talking with CCS about like, is that program fully funded? Are there Is there a greater need than what you have? Um, staff mentioned that for electricity, they're pretty well funded, but based on their funding sources from the county and sub, they actually don't have the ability to pay for trash and water. And so that's where this was like, okay, is there a possibility um to sort of help pay out an overdue water bill or um

36:02 trash service that may be preventing someone from getting trash. Um, so that's where um That's um Is that Do those programs reimburse uh wastewater and stormwater as well? my My understanding is the current programs do not, but I think the idea here is with this one of the funding sources from the state is pretty open in how it's addressing um you know, folks who might have housing instability um or sort of precarious living situation. And so, this is an idea that was generated to say, "Okay, we don't have the same sort of restrictions that the other county or um subfunds do, but you're it's sort of left it to CCS to sort of help cover those other those other needs."

36:48 Um I I like this project. Um I think I think it needs to be sort of vetted a little bit so that we include, you know, other you know, wastewater, stormwater, um and including the re- regional numbers, but I also think before we commit money to it uh that we that we should essentially send our letter a letter to our partners in sub and ask them to match that same amount of money for what water service has been a gap for them for a long time. If we're going to put money into this, you know, they they should be able to match our contribution to help extend that as a program. All right. Um I had Leonard and then then we'll start working our way down the list. Great. Thanks. Uh thanks, Mayor. Um so, my understanding of Aaron um was that uh Representative

37:34 Lively had secured $3 million in state money. Um is that right? Uh he's Yes, as one one of his things. Yes, has secured $3 million for a new manufactured home park in town. Okay. And so, what he's asking for from us to uh um get this mobile home park on the 33 acres up and running would be just some buy-in. Is that right? I mean, that would be significantly less than the 3 million. Well, I guess so. The 3 million, I think Lively did his part in terms of securing the funds um and I would say the reason it's here is uh So, the 3 million was intended for acquisition of land, development costs including infrastructure costs. So, either site infrastructure or road

38:21 improvements um which I think might exceed 3 million, um but I guess the the the reason it's here is wanting some sort of general sense from this body that I don't think we've come to you with the project. Like, do you support, you know, helping make this happen? Like, staff putting this effort and right now we'd be putting effort toward the site that we kind of already own and are trying to figure out would this be a a site that we could also work with to sort of partition off a vacant parcel for this project. And so, we're putting there now and kind of wanting to get a sense like, if council doesn't want this project at all, we could also stop, but if you're kind of

39:06 like, well, let's see, keep going. We have $3 million. How great is that? This is we have a willing partner. Let's look into it. It's kind of what I wanted to get a feel for. Yeah, my feeling is that it would be a shame just to leave that kind of money on the table. On the on the site for Egan, I I know that um Reverend Father Gill would not turn down the money to have sprinkler system installed in her church, and neither would I. I would suggest that the capacity at Ebert is smaller for the Egan site than the Memorial Building, and I I was a shame. I I was very sorry to hear that it's off the table. I so I

39:51 I'd like to suggest that we pick the Memorial Building up off the floor and dust it off a little bit. All right, Marylee, and then it will be Corey after that, and see if I can't get the online folks and the people in the room folks in the right order. I didn't have Memorial Building on my list, but I just added it back in. Cedar did look at the Memorial Building from the idea of being a development issue downtown, a redevelopment, especially to be across from the project that's ongoing at the moment. Um, and I think that that's where I believe that that's where the the decision was was made. Um, uh, so I just wanted to iterate that. Um, I didn't go down through the list. I'm going to go very quickly. The Ekin

40:36 Warming Site at Everett, I always said have thought that that was a pretty good idea. My biggest concern and what I want to see is is I want to make sure that it's vetted before it's before the the contract and everything is drawn up. Um, June has a big heart and gets a lot done in in our area. My concern is if she's not there, um, will will the program continue? Will it be ongoing with someone else who might be in in there and in charge? And we live in a fluid society and we're we're not So don't stay in the same place all the time. So I just want to make sure that what June would like see to see happen there would continue. Um, if we make that investment.

41:21 Um, the Fisher Village to F Street Co-op, I'm totally behind the manufactured home park. Yes, I agree with the conversation that's taken place. Kahoots, I agree with the mayor. I think we should walk out of here and go ahead and do that right now. Um, and downtown Lou, uh, we've got porta-potties next to the next to the where is it? The Art Center right now? Where the museum? One of the two places in that parking lot and it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a permanent one in that area in that site. Um, it's got Wait. Go having having access to facilities, um, was difficult before COVID, has gotten extremely almost impossible in the last 3 years. So I don't necessarily

42:07 see that as a bad idea of having one permanent facility available for people downtown. So that's that I see that. Um, And I the low-income water trash service sounds like a pretty good idea, too. So I said I went down through quickly, but that's I didn't go through that when I first when I first talked. So thank you. And Marylee, June was nodding her head yes that that you know, the church's position that it would continue after she retired. She said she she's sitting in the in the council chambers right now. So Okay. Well, I wasn't trying to put her down in any way or say you know, I like I said, I appreciate everything she's done. I just had a future concern and wanted to make sure that that was that

42:53 was talked about prior to final commitment. Thank you, June. Corey, and then we'll go to Joe. Okay. So I just want to talk about 15 and I'm going to start by owning just some bias. I mean, we all have opinions and bias and I'm just going to own them right up front. Um as cuz I feel differently about this or I'm thinking differently about this than I think both the mayor and counselor Woodrow are. And it's informed by having run a social service agency. So this um $20,000 would go super fast. And I mean, it's basically creating a program. Uh and the fact that we're just we would

43:38 just run it through Catholic Community Services. Not everyone accesses services through Catholic Community Services. So there's that. It's like it's going to probably be if it's similar to the utility programs, it's on a first come first serve basis. That money goes pretty quickly. People who know to access it access it and often folks who may just need it once or didn't even know they needed it and may need to have that kind of assistance. By the time they know that it's available, it's gone. So, that to me is for a one-time investment is like I realize it's $20,000, but also I mean it just it it it's creates a program basically, and there would be a fair amount of um

44:23 stuff to administer that, and then I just dig into just how fair and equitable that is. So, that was just all of like I'm not a fan of that um and have reasons for not being a fan of that. And um I didn't mention it because I've just am completely supportive of more mobile home parks and us figuring out how to do that, but also just want to reiterate that I think if we figure out how to um bank some land, it's going to give us a lot more wiggle room, and whether it's land or buildings, we're going to have more than just the memorial building. We'll have some, you know, some places that we can actually start to develop some of these things in. Okay, that's it. Thanks. Joe. Thank you. Um excuse me. I uh

45:08 I do agree uh completely with what uh Corey Rodly just said. I'm fearful that we would be creating a program or getting something going and then all of a sudden stopping, and the uh the line of communications for the and we know the need is there, but but you know, it may be better we may be better off just sending a check over the county who administers those programs. Most people know that they can go to the county who is the lead social service agency. And um but I but I I do I I mean it's a valid program. Tons of people need that type of help. I want to help those type of people, but I want to be able to be as uh fair as possible across the board, and

45:55 it may be that $20,000 is a very low ball, and we may want to bump that up to 50. I don't care. It it it's a good program. But I But I'm very uh I don't know fearful is the right word, maybe skeptical that that uh Springfield may be stepping on its toe its own toes by opening this door and and not really knowing where it's going to go from there and make a commitment down the road that that um we end up with mud on our face and then saying, "Hey, here was some money. We helped a few people, but we're checking out." And uh that to me is a is um what poor governance is is if we don't do it right, don't do it at all. So, uh I agree with Corey for sure. Um

46:40 So, the But the um the other part about um gosh darn it, I have so darn many notes here is on number six. John, can I get Aaron to clarify something that that might help? Aaron, doesn't Catholic Community Service administer that program for the entire county? I Yeah, I don't know if it's for the county. I think it's for the Eugene-Springfield area. So, they So, the tricky thing with the county is the county is certainly the lead for social services. Uh-huh. But for many things, the county does not actually administer the program. They will hand out those funds through grants. And so, some things I think they do and some things they don't. In this case, um I can say this is one of those things

47:25 I'll put on my list to sort of circle back and like follow up on details, but in this case, um yeah, I can double-check that that nuance between what the county administers and then what CCS is administering. Um I I definitely know CCS is administering subs program, um Project SHARE. Um but I'll Yeah, I can make a note of that. Um Yeah, I'm I'm interested I mean, I just want to Sean, I'm I'm I'm interested. I don't want to sit there and and and try to kill this or anything. It It just I want to see us um do it in the most equitable manner. As Corey mentioned and and I think and even uh Damien, we want to be fair and it's super hard when you're talking about all these kinds of funds out there and you all of a sudden all of a sudden

48:11 everybody's in such a rush to help other people that they create all these different layers that make it more difficult for all the people that need the help. And no, I I I I I hear you, Joe. I don't think you're trying to kill it. I think that's a But I think that when I listen to your comment, which is really on point and really valid, I think that's where that question comes in, which is like, well, you know, cuz you've got third-party vendors all involved in just trying to get a clarification on on that point cuz it seems relevant to the conversation. And and I also acknowledge what you were saying, Shawn, earlier in regards to approaching sub and saying, "Okay, community partner, how can you help how can we partner together in creating a robust system and and sending funds to whoever is disseminating those or creating an accounts or however it's

48:57 managed, but I I want to see other agencies especially sub to step in and be a community partner and has nothing to do with community development that they claim all the time. It has everything to do with with taking care of our community and the citizens therein. So, I'm I completely support that as well. And I I just want to circle back real quick and I'll be done is unless someone says something that gets my thing going again, but um on number six So, um we're looking at those funds and and Aaron, you mentioned and that's what made me come back to this is that you the way you mentioned it was uh to see if there's interest and there's definitely undoubtedly there's interest by I think everybody here. Um but I am

49:45 I'm a little bit gun-shy when it comes to when you said we should we move forward and we should put some time and effort into this, that type of thing, and and yes, I think we should, but I am very concerned as to who's going to pay for that extra effort. And um if it's if it's going to come out of those original funds that that Lively had secured, I support that. Um and I think I would I would personally support not literally putting staff time into it, but I would support if some of those funds can can uh pay directly for a consultant to do that work and then come back and hand a pamphlet over to this to this document over to you or and then to us saying, "Okay, this is what we got, and this is what we need, and this is how we can make it happen. Can you sign here on

50:30 this line?" That's what I would like to see. I don't want to see us overcommit, and I know staff overcommits all the time. I think we're I think we are Oh, I think staff is in that framework, too. To sort of even ask the question, is it even possible to build here? I think is an internal sort of like, you know, do we What are the road What What are we requiring for road improvements? Like what So we can then um Yeah, knowing we're certainly short-staffed in many ways. I think if we got to the point that it made sense that this was in fact the site we wanted to move forward with, then figuring out um we could certainly use the 3 million. Um I would say on the staff time, too, um I'm pretty sure So this was a separate funding to help with infrastructure

51:16 through the state, but it also may need to be a home-funded project for some of the development as well. And so as staff, I see that also as like working toward helping us use those dollars to to say knowing we want to support projects. So it's um Yeah, it's one of those like spidery, like how do we help developers like figure out what could work with the hope that down the road we're also Yeah. I I get that, too, but if uh developers will hire a their own consultant to do some exploratory work on property and they do their, you know, a land use attorney could get would be able to be involved in that and a designer development designer would be involved and those are all private parties that can be privately paid without us having

52:01 to jump and start crawling down that rabbit hole and and find ourselves stuck. I think that's great. I think we're getting at a point though it is our land and it's 33 acres and it's not annexed yet and we haven't partitioned yet and so I can't we don't have something to tell a nonprofit right now is like here's what your acreage is figured out what you can build cuz they don't know. So we're I hear you. We do not like I think staff is trying to just get those basic numbers set first and then we'll probably come back to council honestly at some point but yeah. I hear you. I guess in other words I'm just saying using use these funds that are not out of the city coffers to do as much as we can possibly do without being without having to have to use staff time. So I guess so.

52:48 That's what I'm saying. I will. Great. Seems like it'd be a smart way. I support it. Joe, did you have anything else? Uh no, Sean. Thanks. That's I think I've probably said plenty. All right, Steve. Okay. My list hasn't changed but a couple comments here. The $3 million for the mobile home park um Catholic Community Services. That's kind of projects they like. They've got a lot of experience on. I'm I'm thinking that they're naturally could be involved in that as it goes along. And then the other one here I wanted to want to say I I supported uh camouflaged porta potties downtown but where did my list go? Uh

53:35 Where did it go? Anyway, uh permanent a permanent bathroom downtown. Carter Building we're going to be tearing down. There's going to be property available there and maybe in the future we could carve somehow in that development we could carve out a corner there. Got sewer and water and place it in that location. Whatever happens there. So It's number 12. Yeah, that's okay. It's all Okay. So it looks like we're winding up from a conversation. So Aaron, is there is there it was a a long and in-depth conversation. So I don't know if there's a place that you want to go back to and you know, where you feel like you've got enough sort of direction. I see. I

54:24 I guess the one piece I would love I just cuz it's I've heard certain folks that I don't have a sense of the council. I guess the one big ticket item that would maybe love some guidance on would be the Ant Heart operating costs. Is that something that the council wants to consider at this time putting forward and we can figure out how to how to fund that or um or not. I think that the both pieces of Ant Heart I think would be helpful. I think some of the others I've definitely heard some what I thought was the majority in terms I mean we could run through it is how I'm thinking about it, but I think that was one I wasn't I wasn't sure. And I and I'm looking around. I didn't see a lot of support for support for funding the ongoing costs, right? That

55:10 was a pretty consistent theme from from the council was anything that sort of got ongoing costs that we really want to shy away from. Now, I think you can help point them back to the county. I know that they're looking for more projects in their grant funding to to sort of support from a long-term perspective. And that and that could be something I know in the past this council has asked like what are those projects we can sort of um go to the county and ask for support and it maybe if that is something that this council wants to support but not funds ongoing costs knowing that the county that's sort of the county's role. We could talk about how that could be a project that, you know, either through the HSC or the PHB or whoever we talked to the county about funding. Yeah. Yeah, and I and I think that's a worthwhile conversation to pursue,

55:56 right? If if they if if the nonprofit involved here does require some sort of support from us like a letter or something like that. I think that would be appropriate. Corey? Yes and um because I think I heard that, you know, that they're looking at whether it's land or house or whatever helping them which gives them a place to move forward from. But in terms of like the ongoing costs, I think we we already have a precedent and of supporting things like Catholic Community Services in a regular way. Um and so there's this opportunity and I'm saying this in sort of a clunky way but just thinking, you know, whatever we can do if we all move forward and we are they're able to find a house and they're able to move forward with having a shelter.

56:41 Um then they will be able to access whether it's CD BG funding or whatever in terms of for pieces of ongoing costs if they're serving people in Springfield. So I think it's like it's not it's not a open or close the door. It's a like are there steps to this and they may then be in a in a situation like a Catholic Community Services or a Carry It Forward that's providing services in the county that they would then have access to ongoing funding from other streams if that makes sense. I think I got clearer as I talked longer. And and maybe just again for clarification, does this council support in this case it was Representative Lively putting forward and heart support

57:27 pushing that forward to say passing that on to this group? So help me understand a little bit about what representative Did representative lively put put the capital costs into this as part of his $2 million Yeah. Yeah, so we what what you're asking us is would we sort of be supportive of him submitting the paperwork and acting as the sort of pass-through organization so that they can acquire the house? Right. Okay. That's what I'm asking. Okay. I think I got it, Marylee. I guess I'm looking for vetting on that program.

58:12 Um I don't necessarily don't not support it, but I'm looking for vetting as to how it's going to get set up and who is going to what what is necessary for the staffing and how it's going to to carry on. Um like I said, I don't necessarily not support it, but I would have difficulty right now passing it through with my support because I don't know what I'm supporting. I Yeah, I mean I can clarify. I guess in this case the um where I see representative lively's funds coming in to say helping this nonprofit purchase a

58:59 home and rehab it in order to house um I think five or six uh homeless women. Um Yeah, I think here I think this there is a risk here cuz the funding is not secured in how it will how those costs those operating costs will be paid for. Um I think that's one of those risks with why Aunt Harriet has I would say has trouble from a CDBG or home side cuz like there are so many restrictions or show me this is going to be good for 5 years and what the nonprofit is saying is like we need the building first and then we can figure it out. And so I think it's almost like does this body want to use these one-time funds to sort of help help them get that next step to say yes

59:44 and we can I mean we're staff would also want to put is like if that doesn't work out then let's take the building back and put it forward to a nonprofit for that same purpose that who who that can move it forward um but that that is part of this sort of risk here which is why we're talking about it with these one-time state funds that are pretty kind of kind of more relaxed on the federal side. So why don't my suggestion maybe we should do approach it this way. I I see some additional questions since there's two parts to this conversation. You've got to come back with a you know it's probably going to be a couple weeks with a kind of boiling down all the information that we gave you so that we can look at it is maybe we get a

1:00:29 little bit some of those questions answered and maybe we can punt on specifically having the conversation about about Anne's heart Anne's heart so that we can get real a lot of clarity on there's two separate asks here. One of them is really specific to Representative Lively's money if we were ask acting as a pass-through organization and just some broader information there. And would that make sense to It also may help I mean you certainly said yes to some things and some of those projects are certainly only going to fit certain funding streams and so that might also knowing if any of those funding streams have like are capped or have money left then that might help the second wave of conversation to say okay

1:01:15 here's now what we're actually talking about and what else is on the table. Yes. that way. Joe. Yes, thank you Sean. No, I that's I I like that. I think that makes sense to okay, we put we've thrown a lot back at you and actually this has been I think it's been a very productive meeting for you. It's It's It at least it appears that way to me. I try to put myself in your shoes and say okay, well I I asked for feedback and you you got a a wheelbarrow worth. So, uh but I think this is a great opportunity for you to um boil it down and put it through the sieve process and really look at okay, if we go through all this, this is

1:02:00 what's left over and where and then a second list that we can sieve through that says okay, with the leftover funds these projects will now fit in those funds. I think that to me that would work as linear as I think uh typically is I I think that would uh to me would be very productive. Okay. I look. You think Sean? Oh, I like I think I think we're ready for that next part of the part of the conversation, right? Because I think it's going to help us identify which one of these projects goes to which funding source and it's going to force that that second set of conversations. Um there is there another project that before we wrap up that you wanted to go

1:02:45 back to where you felt like, you know, we were a little bit too all over the place or you good? Um I feel good. I mean, I think some of them need questions answered elsewhere. Um and then I will take that time. I need to go out and get some some questions answered, but I guess also just confirming the Filbert the Filbert Grove manufactured home park. Um again, that was one of uh uh Representative Lively's ARPA request to ask the city as a pass-through to give that and just confirming that I heard many not opposed. And And which to me translates as a yes right now.

1:03:30 Right. But in in for the that specific project, that's the we're acting as a pass-through, right? Like and we're just sort of saying yes to it. Yeah. Yeah. The city will ultimately I As I understand it, there will be an IGA with the Department of Administrative Services. Per- maybe maybe not, but there will be probably some sort of IGA that we will need to sign. And so just confirm that yes, we are good with signing that as the pass-through to continue. Okay. I think I'm seeing head nods. Yeah, okay. I think the other the other piece that I just want to just want to be conscientious of as you go into the next steps, right? Like as sort of um making sense out of the feedback that we

1:04:15 gave is I would say spend the probably the if you're if you're attaching one of these funds, right? Spend the most restricted dollars first, right? And leave the more most flexible dollars for later. I mean, I think that that makes a lot of sense. Um the other piece that that I want you to be to kind of uh focus on is anything we can get done in the next year, right? Like if if some of these projects aren't ready, if if you could bring back a piece of information to say, "Hey, this is a great idea. It's going to be ready in 5 years. It's just not ready yet." That would be a piece of information that I think would be relevant. And then um I I heard a couple of folks mention this, which was kind of thinking about programming staff delivery staff time.

1:05:01 Um if we can if I'm conscientious of the fact that we've got not enough staff to do all this work. And if if we need to bring in a contractor, you know, a consultant, and we need to program dollars associate in these buckets to pay for those folks. I am good with that. Um so, I don't know what the actual regulations are, but I I understand that if that we may need to go out and get more help if we're going to deliver all these projects. Joe. Thank you, Ron. Or it was Thank you. I was just thinking of a person named Ron. So, the um um you mentioned about this other uh potential mental health type facility

1:05:46 in the Thurston area, and I don't know if you if that got any uh if that stuck on the wall for you, Aaron. There uh connecting the two. Right. follow up after this meeting. Um Yeah. So, go ahead. I I have some names and some people that are very interested in in doing that, and that they've been on the they've been planning something like that for the last 5 years. Okay. And and that they're closer to that edge, and and it's it's it's more specifically for mental health for uh uh adolescents and high school age citizens of ours in that in the Thurston area. So, counseling etc. So, um if you want to reach out to me, that's totally fine. I can provide more

1:06:31 information, but I think it may be a a perfect fit. And they're about in that spot where I think that they uh they just don't know how to ask. I guess what it boils down to. So. Great. Then I'll send an email. All right. Corey. And not to prolong the meeting on Oregon's birthday, um but I appreciated what you said about um getting things done, you know, that could get done in the the next year. But that also triggered another think a thought that I have in that I know that like funding is moving, and funds are coming in really quickly from different sources and I think I said this in another meeting but I'll say it again. I have absolute confidence that we're tracking that and just want to also say out loud we need to track

1:07:16 that because I think when you're talking about restrictive funding it's not just restrictive in terms of what it can be used for but when it can be used. So I know that different buckets of money are like this has to be used by 2024, this can be extended till 2030 or whatever. And so I think that's part of the the matrix of us thinking about these projects is maybe there is an opportunity for us to put something on the back burner knowing that it's going to take 5 or 10 years before it would come to fruition and we have the money to spend but let's spend the money that needs to be spent quicker. Um and again I still believe that then we can leverage that into bringing more funding as long as it's out there. So that's just the other piece I want to say. Thank you.

1:08:01 All right. I think we've gotten to the end of the conversation. So And I'll just I'll add we have a work session scheduled with you all April 4th to revisit this. So I actually think there might be plenty of time to explore and get some answers. So um Good. Good. Looking forward to then. Great. Thank you so much Erin. Thank you all. We are adjourned for the evening. Thank you everybody. Good night.