Springfield City Council — October 10, 2022

0:10 all right I'm going to call the city council work session to order with roll call Mayor Van Gordon here counselor Pitts here on salimo here councilor Radley here councilor stair here councilor Woodrow and cancer Pictionary yes thank you and counselor uh Woodrow is excused for the evening and uh we've got a couple of items today um first one sports commissions committee's discussion with Mary Bridget Smith and while you're loading that up um normally I just wanted to I guess acknowledge the fact it's indigenous peoples day um we did Issue a resolution sort of uh supporting that it you can find that on the website since we're not at a regular session I'm not going to read it into the record all right

0:56 very Bridget good evening mayor and Council I'm here tonight to have a follow-up discussion on boards commissions and committees this is follow-up from um some topics that came up at the council retreat in the spring the packet tonight just has two attachments the first attachment is the um section of the operating policies and procedures that deals with boards and commissions just to give you some framework for the kind of regulations around it and then the second item is this PowerPoint on boards commissions and committees I know you have two other items tonight so I just want to check in before I launch into the PowerPoint if you would

1:41 like to just start with discussion about questions or if you want me to kind of tee things off with the PowerPoint I just want to make sure you have enough time to provide your feedback my thought on this information tonight is what I'm not necessarily looking for a specific Direction about how to change your process but whatever the issues are that came up if there's a further way we can kind of deal with um figuring out what that direction is whether it's through like a subcommittee or another meeting back before the council or however you want to work it so um anyway I just wanted to leave that to you first before I get going here on the slides Joe well actually I was just I would probably head even I was on slide nine so you're on slide nine okay

2:28 towards your head I think it started and give us about 30 seconds into a discussion for okay so just to kind of frame up the discussion here tonight so we're talking about boards committees and commissions um this is a follow-up from Council Retreat only in this instance tonight we're talking about Council committees I know there are lots of other intergovernmental commissions that you are members of subcommittees uh project related CCI committees that's like your development code Review Committee that kind of thing and really tonight what I'm trying to do is sort of tease out what is the purpose of this committee and what's the council role there what's the selection process because that seems to be that's where there's more process around that and then what is the role

3:13 and experience for the person who is the committee volunteer so looking at the next slide this is just because I'm your lawyer and I feel like I always got to have something legal in here but um here's the legal framework for Ford's um commissions and committees so it is mentioned in the charter it's quite brief as it should be but it talks about how the job really is uh the mayor points consistent with your rules and you can also Mayors can also have mayoral committees some committees have statutory reference so that would be your budget committee Planning Commission even library and historic commission do and then your Council operating policies and procedures and then bylaws and um

3:58 Springfield Municipal Code moving on here so what I tried to do with the rest of the slides is just kind of give some think a little bit about these different committees instead of just having them all kind of grouped into one group so starting I don't want to put like that one is more important than the other but I did try and kind of figure out okay what what are the different things that these committees do so I thought I would start with the budget committee this is a statutory committee it's different than other committees that you have and that the counselors are members of these committees and then you appoint there is um you know the role of the budget committee is to approve the budget and taxes and conduct public meetings so this is a committee it has a lot of interaction with the public in terms of process

4:43 um we have an equal number of electors that's qualified voters there is a separate recruitment for this so this is a little off track from the rest of your um bccs high level of Staff support here so it's gonna be a little different than another committee you might have where you know like a museum committee or other committees that do a wide variety of items this committee is really zeroed in on the budget this often can be a stepping stone for elected office as well and only meets during specific times of the year Planning Commission is our next committee this committee actually meets more often throughout the year has a lot of regulatory um as you know who have been on the

5:29 Planning Commission before has a lot of regulatory obligations in terms of land use process it is generally part of our batch recruitment in the fall that sometimes will go off depending on how many people or openings they have in that committee because it's important that it keeps going and runs at a full full number of members there's a council liaison high level of Staff support here and what I mean by that are like you know staff reports a lot of process for hearings all that kind of stuff I mean there's a lot of interaction here between staff and the commission and they make decisions that are really impactful for the city no question sure I'm curious why somebody can't be on the Planning Commission and the budget commission at the same time sure so the operating policies and procedures

6:15 state that uh I think it's a and it's there's a little more wiggle room it says whenever possible someone won't be on another governing body um and the um Planning Commission or budget committee so actually to be more accurate that Pro I probably shouldn't be so explicit to say you can't be on one or the other but that has been the practice over time perhaps that's related I mean that's an old thing it could be related to the stepping stone right that you just want a little more variety in these two uh big committees that's all I know find a commission we've always said is is homework for being a counselor eventually yes yes definitely the um next committee is the cdac this is the committee who works on the home

7:00 funds and the cdbg funds and there is a counselor and a planning commissioner who sits on this committee I believe this is part of your batch recruitment in the fall and they meet more regularly specific very specific to a task um so different than another committee like a library Advisory board or a bpac that's meetings throughout the year to talk about things um six residents within the ugb so not necessarily just City of Springfield residents historic Commission is a committee has statutory and uh Springfield Municipal Code and development code basis these are folks who are have a stewardship of our historic assets they do similar to the

7:46 Planning Commission do review land use applications and make recommendations and some of their items there is someone from DPW Museum staff as ex-officio members this has a little different um residency requirements and membership requirements than you might see in other committees and again they have a council liaison and this one remember they have a connection to the Washburn historic district Mary B yeah so it seems as though planning and budget and cdac are sort of elevated so to speak um as bodies that you cannot be a member of two of is that okay that's true the operating policies say okay we don't that generally they want I think it says

8:32 whenever possible someone's going to just be on one committee and I think that's the try and get at that idea of variety throughout okay and then there's that specific thing about Planning Commission and budget committee not being a member of another governing body but it's not written down anywhere it's just a practice it's a practice that is recommended in your operating policies and procedures but it's done in a way that gives you some flexibility sorry so Leonard we put it yeah we're the ones who put it in there and those are probably Circa I don't know maybe 2014. yeah um and when if if my memory serves we were just at a spot where we're having a lot of folks serve on multiple places at the same time and we wanted to try to get out of way to try to guide us to a more I guess the wider variety of folks

9:18 but cdac is not such a hard and fast rule um I think when I looked at the cdac piece the concern I would have with if we were talking about places where we had a liaison right is that it has a liaison to a committee that you're already on right so and I I you know I'm not sort of speaking for everybody this is Sean's mind at work here is that they have a Planning Commission liaison and if somebody's on the you know to have half the Planning Commission sit on that committee wouldn't make any sense to me because they already have somebody whose job it is to represent the Planning Commission okay is that the issue was was specifically that but also the council's concerned and still my concern to this day is to

10:03 make sure that members of the Committees and commissions do not have a wide breadth of influence as opposed to having a greater breadth of influence from many more people that's that's the issue so that's why we said okay your your control or your advice or your input in this committee is great but that same person shouldn't have that type of influence in another influential committee good Corey um thanks we've taken over now here we go yeah um so way to Tee It Up For Us very Bridget it took seven minutes I think um I totally agree with trying to have as many different people involved as possible um and putting some some parameters and

10:50 some limitations and I appreciate sharing the decision making around that was to try to kind of limit the decision making of non-elected folks um I think is a reasonable thing to do um and the one thing that I wanted to move into is can we talk a little bit about the the just get really clear about the difference between a liaison um and a counselor who has like a seat on a committee sure okay so cdec is a good example of that one counselor is on the C deck is how it looks and right I think that's cancer moment right now um as opposed to the liaison rule right and so that's the one I think that does have you know this is an area where

11:36 flexibility also kind of can result in some uncertainty because when you're the liaison and depending on the committee I think there's some uncertainty about what the role is for the counselor who is you know do I have to go to Every meeting am I participating what does the staff what's the staff liaison do and then there's also often a committee chair or a committee liaison so we got like Liaisons like for some committees just all over the place which I think is intended to be a good thing a helpful thing but it sometimes can result in sort of maybe people not feeling like they understand what the role is so it would be helpful to have some understanding about what counselors are thinking about what their role is because I know often staff will say to me I don't know what I'm supposed to be doing with the council liaison like what are we doing here so it is something that I think is well intended but maybe

12:23 just a little more discussion go ahead Steve I no I think now that we're on video we get a lot more public response to these committees because at one time we couldn't get anybody to volunteer for these things I've actually been grabbed in the hallway and Drug into the financial department fill out an application for the budget committee five minutes till five years ago so that's the way it sort of was then and uh but now we're getting lots of people that's wonderful yeah I think so too so I I think maybe it would be helpful to kind of have one have that have that discussion about liaison and how people how people approach that so I think about about this with you know a couple of things in mind one of them is

13:08 hey when I'm sit going to a committee what do I bring back to the counselor what do I sort of share with folks to kind of keep people apprised about what else is sort of percolating out there that could be anything from events to to um issues things people are working on use the information to communicate when when I talk when I talk to folks the other piece I think is really valuable here is to sit with um to sit with the committee and just talk to about where like use your experience right on committees that I sit on sometimes when when people are sort of stuck about well why do we do it that way or you know is that going to go over well with the rest of the council you know I could I can talk to that because I sat with

13:53 everybody long enough to know well that's probably not gonna go against the kind of where where the council wants to go with a certain thing and provide some sort of advice or refinement to work that the committee is doing um to me I think it also could be you know there's some there's some committees where you maybe you can't make it and to me a good liaison role would be to regularly touch base with that with that chair and just be like okay what do you guys need is everybody moving the right way right what are you guys actually working on so that we can make sure that these are all committees that advise us that ultimately a the citizens are having a great time on a committee and B it's sort of working towards a broader goal that we we would like them to work towards

14:45 keeping Liaisons as a helpful tool this is what it's done correct okay okay and we we just have to I don't know at what document we we put it in but we have to be clear that a we don't have a vote but B right like the role is really to sort of report back about that month to month or quarter to quarter work and sort of interface and be a be a support structure for the for the Committees committee chairs to ensure that you know that it is being productive okay several of the bodies actually want us to report to them too about what's going on with the city and I think that's fine and I yeah and I think sharing your information right that's where what we do what we do best is is share information that we know

15:30 code Corey um I don't know what that I mean I think it looks different in different um ones but I just feel like there's some sort of clarity to get to around that whether it's defined by each one when a when a counselor becomes to Liaison to understand like are you interacting with staff or are you interacting with the chair or if you're interacting with the chairs because I think that it's all that's been part of the swirl of not knowing whose role is what if that makes any sense at all Joe oh like your hand was towards your

16:16 um I think that's something that you know we can work on as staff to kind of give some direction about especially if someone's new to taking over a committee you know I think then they learn that there's Council meetings on and a committee chair and they're like well you know so I think we can help kind of frame that up a little more so they can understand it it may it may look different from the for the historic commission than it would look for the vpac or whatever and that's totally fine so that's something I think on our end we can confirm up a little bit and I think as a group the idea for us is probably less is more right like we want like you know some people are brand new to doing this we want to help them get to a point that they're being successful at sharing committees but if everybody's sort of off and running the Committees right like you can you can take about half a step back you don't have to be involved in everything yeah

17:06 foreign I think we're just back to the last slider those are those committees um your SPAC bpac Museum committee Arts commission those types of groups you know do a wider variety of things for the city um I would say they have a really important interaction with the you know they're a nice link between the community and city government um but they they do different things their selection process though is similar it's all part of that fall batch recruitment that we've had for the last few years some tweaks with membership and then some of these committees too remember will have like a non-voting member from William Elaine or the school district or whatever to kind of bring that expertise in there um but that's sort of your last sort of kind of grouping of committees I think

17:52 that um one thing that would be helpful to understand is if the selection process is working the way the council is seeing or if there's some tweaks there that um would make sense Joe's first JoJo so Corey do you have opinions go ahead Joe so the uh I mean I I thank you for putting it all together I'm sure it was difficult um and it may just be easier again going back to what I said earlier is that uh members of One of any committee and commission are discouraged and or I guess discouraged or not used as on other committees so we don't have that okay breadth of control from one person secondly on page five when it comes to

18:38 the Planning Commission it says um wrong one on cdac it says six residents within ugb which means that there's six people that may not be citizens of Springfield so how many people total are on SeaTac six residents then the Planning Commission and the counselor who sits on the committee is my understanding I think that they can't be a resident for just in the ugb and outside the city there my understanding is is that that right now the committee allows that they don't necessarily have to be residents within City Limits which is my point got it so the way it's written we can have six non-residents on this committee I

19:23 suppose theoretically yeah so I think that that's a a place that we need to Define to make sure that we have citizens on this on the committee and yeah if we want to allow one or two that are in the ugb and outside the city limits I'm okay with because we have that exception to other committees but I think the way it's written we should make sure that we have a certain number of actual citizens okay my I I will say to that is the cdec if there are some federal regulations about the cdbg funds and that stuff yeah whatever you know obviously within guidelines if there's something that if there's something that says no we can't have that which wouldn't make any sense at all for sure okay and then um moving down to page seven

20:08 um actually wouldn't be that's one's accurate where it comes to the um selection process where it's a resident property owner other public agencies and local and local Specialists with expertise we made an exception with historic commission when we put this together in regards to some people that have some um because the Washburn district and have some crazy expertise that are out in the field or come even from Corvallis I think we had one person but but it's worded the same way on the um Museum arts SPAC d-pac which I never saw or heard of that exception allowed on those committees

20:54 so all those committees that I'm aware of require citizens to be on that and there's this limited number of folks that are living in Eugene within the ugb but we didn't allow for the the Specialists out of the area yeah this could be my um just formatting here and trying to get trying to be a little too concise so Museum arts back in bpac when I say resident I think I'm talking about in-city limits there and then you're gonna ha and I'll confirm and then I think it could be a resident or a property owner within City Limits and then the other public agencies the local Specialists and expertise those folks often are ex-official right I just want I mean because if we're going to be nod our head to this work and having some of those things outlined there that that

21:39 may not be reflective of what's there I want to make sure I pulled out I guess what I what I'm hearing from you is that importance on folks who are residents or Property Owners within City Limits absolutely more so than people with longer area Okay people with dogs in the fight gotcha okay Corey okay um so I appreciate this being all laid out like this it is super helpful um and also we've been talking about this and thinking about it and I think one of the things for me is um the selection process the way that we take all of these and um do these interviews in public and I think that there's a difference and now seeing this it's like oh this makes it really clear to me I think that some of

22:24 these like the museum the Arts the bpac all of those I think the selection process could be done at the committee level and not and maybe it's just a final approval either by the mayor by Council saying here's the thing because I think that it's going to be a much more relevant and thorough selection process if you've got and whether it's like Guided by staff or what and they put together a subcommittee and then they interview folks they choose them and they come up with the finalists as opposed to folks coming and answering the same three questions and I think I've shared that but not said a lot in public so that's the thing the other piece around the selection process is I think think we could look at those now that you you know you I really appreciate how clear you were around the

23:09 um like the Planning Commission and the the budget committee um because those also we say that we're um particularly the budget committee were appointing by we go out we try to find people for each Ward but in the end we can just appoint people from wherever so in my dream world I would love for us to get really clear about either people can come from wherever and it's going to be a much more political process of like whoever decides they want to put whoever or we are going to appoint by Ward um whether it's a direct appointment which some bodies do where each counselor gets a appointment and they can make that appointment or we're going

23:55 to only we're going to wait and appoint somebody who's from that word to be part of those so I just wanted that's my my vote is to get clearer around that and then the other piece for me around the selection process and then I'll shush and let somebody have uh is is to to just tighten it up make it relevant make sure everybody's going through the same process whatever we decide it is um as opposed to like you know like you said you have five minutes you apply you're in you know that sort of thing like I want us to like just sort of level up on the integrity and the process okay now shush Leonard and then we'll go to Damien so I I wanted to propose a tweak that was uh it goes a little bit in a little bit in the same direction as

24:41 counselor Pictionary in a way um the opposite direction it's um what I wanted to suggest was that if we don't have enough people that are inside the um growth boundary then have an extension and when it becomes clear that nobody from within the growth boundary is going to be applying to fill out all of the positions then I would much if I were given the choice between um somebody qualified and credentialed from outside the growth boundary or nobody I want those people on there I mean that credential the person yeah the credentialed person and um it just seems to me that it's there it doesn't really serve anyone's

25:26 interest not to have not to have as many qualified people as we can provided that we've given an ample opportunity to people inside the growth boundary to yeah so City Limits I mean City Limits are growth I mean City Limits okay got it yeah that's right Damien uh yeah so a lot of things I mean I think the first thing that doesn't sit well with me is that we've identified the planning and the budget commission as being the two that create a pipeline to being on Council those are also the most rigid uh as well as you know their their elements of legality and so while that's cool I mean I I I I don't like that we're looking at

26:13 those two boards as pipelines to being on city council because somebody on cdac somebody on his history museum something that has more of a cultural piece uh in a lot of ways would be just as if not more qualified I mean they can learn to other stuff and so I I really think we should rethink uh using that because also what it does is create hierarchies oh the budget and Planning Commission are great and if you want to be a council counselor or mayor or or Jesus or something crazy like that then you need to be on that and so it kind of negates any you know greatness uh from some of the other committees and so I'm I'm against that completely uh

27:00 two I think one of the issues is you know we can talk about processes and stuff but I don't think that boards and commission members even know their role sometimes they don't know the role of the chair staff liaison I mean and and what it does it creates confusion and it can creates frustration to people like well why am I on this you know board when I have not had any orientation uh I am not aware of what role this person or that person and I've even asked you know boards or commissions I've been on as a liaison what is my role and they had no idea and I was referred to the staff person uh also with the staff person I mean I think we need to be very careful because one we

27:47 don't want to occupy their time if it's not in the job description you ask them to do something extra so we need to be cognizant of that uh but I I just think that we need to look at the purpose of all the boys because I remember merely said a long time ago you know when she first came out Council there weren't this many boards and commissions and so how do we revalidate and provide some power to these boards in commission how do we create an opportunity for people to Excel and to grow to where if they put that on their resume not saying to these people resume builders but they put that on their resume they can have an accomplishment not a bullet like attended meetings like you know we need to get past that but we need to also figure out ways to provide some type of

28:34 power to some of the chair have them involved in the selection process and create a a good enough experience where people would want to potentially be on another board or you know continue to serve even if they're not on the board uh because I just don't think we're there yet and I think we need to do a self-reflection to ask ourselves you know would you be on this board or commission if you didn't have to and I think a lot of times answer would be no and so we need to take it to the streets and create a survey to talk to the staff the council the board and commission members to see how they feel because I think a lot of my uh problems came from conversations not necessarily just mine so I'm I'm done

29:19 talking uh but yeah I mean I think we need to figure out ways to revalidate and I think that's a period of self-reflection uh yeah there we go I'm done all right Joe excuse me thank you so in regards to comments by counselor rodley in regards to selection um as a council there was a time where the Committees were uttering recommendations or even and there wasn't placement they were sending up recommendations the council we ran into several different roadblocks or several different issues regarding that so the council as a whole said at the time which I still concur with is that we want to reserve that ability to pick who we wish

30:05 to pick and place on those committees and and I understand if there's there's people with expertise one dot they have the opportunity to convey that to us at the time of application but I definitely want to reserve the ability for Council to make all appointments on committees uh second is that uh with Damian I I agree with that with the term I was kind of surprised when I saw that term on these slides this pipeline I really did I was like we're Stepping Stones I'm sorry um I I hadn't seen that before it's it's been you know I think people look and Damien it's it's I think people look at those committees because they are uh very uh they're pretty

30:51 finite there's some legal process there's some more uh you know there's different processes and much more official so to speak processes as compared to a much more laid-back type committees that are dealing with bikes and and art and things like that so but I think as far as uh public perception I agree with you I think anybody that is involved in the city at whatever level should be looked at and recruited from and tried to bring up into the council I don't think anybody would be should be Exempted from that but I do disagree with using the those committees as as being known as stepping stones but it's almost unavoidable because of the work they do it's it's it's kind of a place where it's like

31:36 okay we're going to be heavily involved with a lot of things here especially the Planning Commission every week and you got a lot of complex things and you have some actual decisions that are being made and that's very similar to what a counselor does experience on the bench here so I I can you know it's it's good on a resume but as far as I wouldn't I've never really turned them as stepping stones I've always just looked at as a good experience on a resume and something definitely not to negate yeah all right so let's go through the couple of places where I hear agreement and then we can flesh out the places that uh the places that we don't have that we may need to to talk through more of them I I hear a lot of people saying that we really need roles and responsibilities

32:21 you know and how that how that's delivered but just sort of putting that in on a piece of paper where we all agree about this is the role of the liaison this is the role of the chair and this is the role of the staff right and I'm looking around and I'm seeing head nods about that one um that can be by committee though right I mean like it it can look differently for different committees I think it could um I would say if we could if we could try to get to one basic I guess framework okay um you know that that could be that could be important um I think for this is an assignment for the for um you know I guess a comment for the rest of the council is the rest of the you know there's going to be room for us to do our job in a way that makes sense

33:06 to us based on our schedules and our experience and so I don't want to get too rigid here I want to make sure we kind of agree and go okay here here's kind of the play and let folks work work the process the way the way they know how to how to do it does that make sense okay um the ugb process I I think is a question that's always got to be sort of fleshed out right so I think there's two things I hear and you know um one of them is that there's committees that from a regulatory perspective you know require that we include people from the ugb and then they're you know outside of those if there's not a federal law or a state law that requires it that we would prefer folks that you know where residents or Property Owners of Springfield or in the in the place where we require

33:54 a technical skill so um and I think you identified a lot of those um I think that's an open quite like I think that's I think that's a I think that's an open question you want to make your comment yeah as far as I guess what I'm saying is I want to heavily stress that the vast majority of the city members of any committing commission within the City of Springfield need to be citizens of Springfield the one or two outliers that may be necessary as as counter steered mentioned that you know hey we're scratching for some folks here and that we have this person that's very qualified but they live you know outside the ugb or they live in Coburg or

34:40 whatever then we can look at that and make an exception on a case-by-case basis but not create spots for people that are outside the city and or outside the ugb if that makes sense yeah I think that makes sense to me and that could be something that we can get at and when we revise your operating policies I think we can just update that language and that's that's what you're saying right yeah pretty much I mean I I wouldn't I wouldn't rule out of being 50 50 but I mean it would be it should be the exception and not the rule yeah I mean what I'm hearing you I'll say is you want Variety in the breadth of people who serve on your committees you want them to have a a stake in Springfield so the way you one way you demonstrate that is that your resident or property owner in Springfield or within the ugb and you may have some technical expertise that you know maybe

35:26 you don't live in Springfield but you're connected to whatever that exercise is and you're going to be able to bring that to that committee so I I get it better you know our footnote to that is that some exceptions may be made for people that have shown or have an expertise in the field it seems that some of these committees might have statutory things where you need to have something exactly but okay instead of putting a number to it just say some exceptions can be made okay okay that sounds good it's in general we're keeping the rule that is designed to guide the council to to pick a wide variety of folks that sit on that sit on committees yep yep and then um I think like to drink Damien's point right like you know having a good orientation you know an onboarding plan and then the place where I hear the most I guess disagreement and it all is

36:12 around of the appointment process personally I'm in faith like I'm in favor of us appointing people that are on Council committees um and seeing folks um and that and that's just yeah but that's just a product of there are appointments and we've had this go sideways on us in the a couple of times but I think there's two questions here one of them is hey do we want to just take this question about how we appoint people and let I know there's some folks here that are interested in meeting as a subcommittee and let people flesh out like listen to the conversation and kind of flesh out a proposal because personally the batch process like I would be okay if we did something different than the batch process um or do you guys want to try to flush it out right now we've been trying to speed the process

36:57 up because cancel is running out of time was everything that we've been having to do so we've condensed it I don't think what we're doing right now is is the right way to go so uh that's what I think about that so we I'd like to find something a bit different Corey yeah and I'm open to either I mean we could we could fight about it now or we could just have a committee and come back but um I think one of the things that's this one of the things I think about the current process one I I'm not crazy about the batch process I would rather we just appointed in a way that works with the whole calendar and with the work of those committees but um secondly is I I think if if we're if we really

37:42 are concerned about who are on these committees and having the council approve them I think that there needs to be a more appropriate um sort of vetting process as opposed to like everybody fills out the same application it then comes and we ask them the same three questions it seems like the questions for being on the historic commission should be a little bit more nuanced than just how do you see your work in the you know we just say we say how do you see yourself contributing to the work of blank so if there was a vetting process again however you want to do it now we're like if there was a way that the committee was actually helping to shape those and if they come to council for a final interview and approval so be it but it just needs to be more I think just more

38:27 tailored to the work of that committee so that people get more invested from the beginning okay Damien um yeah so I mean kind of related to counselor's point I mean I think one thing about the application we need to decide what's the standard I mean the applications are it was pretty much the same one I filled out for Council uh and there was nothing that said hey upload a resume but then there are other people who apply you know at the same time as I did they had and an extra page they had a resume and so that can either because me personally I stay within a box and I think the last interviews we did most people stay

39:12 within that little block but then in the past there were people who submitted a bunch of stuff to me you know you don't submit what you're not asked for but we need to figure out what we need to ask for do we want to ask for a resume a cover letter do we need to expand uh kind of like with councilor I say how do we have addition different questioning but also do we give them more space uh or do we say hey you got this space I need you to keep it simple bottom line up front uh kiss Bluff method you know uh because there's an inequity across if we don't just say hey this is all we want or hey you're allowed to do this but also if we do allow people to add stuff we can't

39:57 use that as a gig against somebody else and so that's something we need to think about the actual application itself and what will be accepted and won't what won't be Leonard um with uh with regard to what counselor Pitts just said I I certainly don't think we should discourage cover sheets or resumes I think that it would militate against um younger people participating in this process and uh for that reason I'm I'm against having it as a hard and fast rule let's do this right I know there was an interest in a in doing the subcommittee like if if folks and I believe it was Damien Corey and Leonard yes um you know and if there are more more folks if everybody wants to talk about

40:42 it we can we can have you know we can schedule more work session time about it but like take maybe have them meet and kind of hash out at least the framing of this yeah and and then let us dive into it right because knowing that in sort of I guess I'm looking at you you folks is like encompassing kind of what we we had talked about right like generally right like we we need to see we need to see folks you know what are the questions you guys want to ask right and what is some of those other process type type things that from an appointment perspective and it sounds like and I'm gonna and I'm gonna is that we're open to ditching the batch recruitment probably not this cycle because we're

41:28 right in the middle of it now like I see AJ over there going no no no no no no no um but probably going well probably going into 23. do I jump so a couple things on the whatever you're creating in regards to the committee's folks on how it's the recruitment process whatnot I think part of the committee not just a listener to Big manager scribe would be staff so staff can provide input to us for us that works out what what is staff's references because they're the ones that have to deal with the workload and they're the ones that have to try to get you know the timelines Etc so if I was to be listening for recommendations and trying to craft

42:13 something I would definitely include staff on a on a eye to eye level okay that's a good input can we also include I mean if we're going to do a subcommittee uh uh you know if we don't include the voices of those who are currently on committees or serving those positions then we're pretty much making the decision for them and I think we need to try to avoid that because we need to ask them how they're feeling because like I said these conversations have been had uh and we need to include them and I think it can be a qualtric survey that's anonymous uh or something but we can't do this without seeking their input Corey go

42:58 ahead I like both of these ideas one I think it'll be important to have staff as part of that subcommittee to let us know what can and can't be done and Damian's mentioned this a few times and I think a survey of folks who are a part of and maybe the last year were part of these boards and commissions would make some sense like a survey must be yeah Matt like get out there okay all right so get as much input as possible yeah so here I think here's going to be the The Challenge and then we'll dive into the one question I think we can provide some direction on right like one of them is is really we don't need to make this into a science project right like so um I'm like I'm good if if we plan on putting out a survey right I'm good

43:44 trying to limit this to sort of one Quest you know one really thing to sort of flesh out I just want to make sure that we kind of have a clear starting and and stopping point because our time with Damian's running running short and I want him to make sure that he sees it sees it sees it to an end and Damian's making that like we gotta hurry up through this um you know I yeah we can bring some more folks in get you guys sort of the the feedback that you need really I think the outcomes are looking for are revamped uh a revamped appointment process saying that knowing that it would come in front of council and then whatever that whatever that would look like and I'm open to Unique questions per per person you know and I'm sure you'll find something out of a survey but I'm just being a little conscientious about not

44:30 to overbuild this well that helps me one okay so one last question that I had and then I'll throw it open because we're only 15 minutes over so you know this is what happens when we you know we punt off the the committee conversation that we've been trying to have for about six months the one thing we haven't answered and provided direction is what we want to do about the budget issue by budget committee issue that's specific by Ward right and again if you guys want to wait and find it out now uh or find it out later I think we just need to choose what direction that we're going because it is a point of um it is a stress point among among the

45:15 council okay Glenn Leonard well I I think it's my ward that's most uh affected by this and I gotta say I mean I tried to get people to volunteer I think we've all I think we did an interview a couple of people um and you know if there's nobody if there's nobody who applies what do we do I mean it seems like we need to fill the position so I'm not I I'm not a um a hardliner on putting one from each Ward onto the budget committee I I just I think it's counterproductive in the long run but I do think it should be a priority Joe I I see you I see your point for sure I

46:00 I I prefer that budget committee members come from each Ward I've got to have a voice from different parts of the city that being said I know it's sometimes extremely hard to recruit somebody to sit on the budget committee um I've been able to do it since 2004. so I'm not unique it's it's it takes work and it you really got to get out there and and you can you can find them but it takes a lot of effort and I think the counselors should be willing to put that effort forward because after all the person that they find is also representing the ward in which they're supposed to represent and so it's it's a huge responsibility and it's

46:45 um and to me it's very important responsibility and I think that budget committee members should come from each board all right that means again that being said he runs the thing is like okay well there is a potential which it has happened before in the past that we don't have somebody so then you know kind of like saying okay well then let's just yeah leave the spot open as far as I'm concerned don't worry well and I think yes and we also have had and the last round was one of those where we had people from Wards who were then out appointed by people from a different word so people are like you know we'd rather have this person up here even though you're from this board so I think that that's another thing that we need

47:30 to sort of that's not like we need to get clear about that that are we going to prioritize people from the Ward or are we going to do everybody in a batch and choose the three people that the the majority of council selects so that's where I'm like how do we do how does that how do we do that because I also would like to see if we're going to be by Ward we should be by Ward well I'm I'm hearing a lot of by Wards right so this may just be Mary Bridget helps us reminds us what we what we said to ourselves go ahead Damian uh one thing that we need to think about is how can we better let me how can we let people know better what work they're in even when I you know took office I had

48:15 to double checked to make sure and then when I looked at the map it was still kind of confusing uh and so I mean you know and I've mentioned this before the awards don't necessarily have an identity uh and so with that being said people I guarantee you if you were to walk up to somebody and they would ask you what worth they're in they'd have no idea uh especially if they haven't been engaged or they're new uh or I mean a lot of times if they come from a specific identity that they don't see represented and so how can we either create identity around Wards I mean this is this is top level stuff but you know it's planting the seed how do we create

49:00 identity around Wars where people know you know I mean that was just I lived in when you say where you're from you know people know exactly where it is there's an identity and I just don't think that really existed here and so if we want to have somebody by Ward that's going to speak for the war then we need to determine what is the identity of each Ward and figure out ways so that people aren't know what the boundaries are because it's really hard to tell by the maps that are currently online okay so I'm I'm hearing we're keeping the award the preference rewards right that we sort of talked about it and we all we're all on the same page and I know at least seven people that are sitting in this room that know what board they're in but we got to get the other sixty thousand on the same page thank you Mary Bridgette all right thank you thank you all right next item we have

49:45 climate friendly and Equitable communities rulemaking process parking requirements and I'm already exhausted with Sandy Belson good evening mayor and Council yeah this is Staff here Sophie here no I I think it was Sandy for the evening oh Sandy okay I believe Sophie is online yes okay so Sophie McGinley is online she has um prepared the PowerPoint and is helped on this project as as Christina kras our local expert on the climate friendly Equitable rules uh my name is Sandy Belson I'm the comprehensive planning manager okay before you get us all like fired up about how upset we are with the state um I'm going to look to Christina and

50:30 remind have Christina remind us what conversation are we having are we having a lawsuit conversation are we having the we have to do this until the rest same conference same guidance from the last session on this two uh two weeks ago the we are appealing planning to appeal um these rules as a city along with several um almost a dozen other local governments around the state of Oregon so we recognize that there are significant frustrating points challenges counterproductive requirements and these rules all of that will be in our petition for review and briefing as part of the appeal so we are not talking about those aspects of the rules this evening we are focused on implementing in the meantime my advice to the council

51:16 has been we have to move forward with making decisions around implementation because we don't have the time or the luxury of waiting and so that's the focus for tonight um certainly if you have concerns about um you know legal issues with these rules or other things that may be relevant to the appeal I'm really happy to have those conversations one-on-one outside the council meeting all right thanks Christina back to you Sandy sure thing so I did give an a broad overview of the rules at your September 26th meeting the objective for tonight is to provide a little bit closer look at the parking component of the administrative rules that were adopted in July and I tonight I am seeking Direction um

52:01 so we are looking at how we need to approach phase two of the parking requirements so uh in this presentation I will provide some background context the project timeline we'll talk about phase one and then the phase two and what the options are within phase two so a little bit of background we have made progress in Springfield laying the groundwork for parking rules our transportation system plan was adopted in 2014 and includes policies that are explicitly intended to reduce dependence on the single occupancy Vehicles very similar to The Climate goals in the climate-friendly Equitable communities rules

52:48 from 2016 to 2020 Springfield engaged with the community in an extensive process to figure out the right balance of tools for Springfield to meet these objectives Springfield was stricter than the sea thick that's the climate from the Equitable communities so I'm going to shorten it to cfac so Springfield was stricter than the CPAC rules require in some instances and more lenient in others as Springfield lowered the minimum parking requirements added parking maximums and increased opportunities for developers to right-size parking requirements ah a few of these Provisions though not all of them will help Springfield comply with the cfac rule requirements such as

53:33 Springfield's existing maximum parking requirements our bicycle parking standards and maximum block length requirements so just to make sure we're understanding what we mean by these different terms I'm going to go over a couple slides one is parking minimums so parking minimums require people who develop property to include a certain number of on-site parking spaces so this is a mandatory requirement for on-site parking they are just that they are a minimum so developments may include more than the minimum parking allowed next slide our parking maximums so the parking maximums

54:19 um are a ceiling whereas the parking minimums are a floor so parking maximums which Springfield has adopted limit the amount of on-site parking that can be required for a development so this timeline shows the two phases of parking rule implementation along with the electrical vehicle conduits which is that middle component so the first phase deadline is quickly approaching and then the second phase is broader in scope and requires the council to make choices now in order to meet the implementation deadline so let's move on to the next slide

55:04 so phase one this affects um arcing near Transit and then certain uses and this will go into effect at the end of this year excellent so for the near Transit piece so this map is showing properties that are within half a mile of a frequent Transit Corridor and so in our case frequent Transit corridors means Route 11 and MX line So within that half a mile of those two frequent Transit lines we are not allowed to

55:49 require any minimum parking for new development or Redevelopment foreign also for certain uses we cannot mandate more than one space per unit for residential developments with more than one unit and there are we cannot require any on-site parking for the following uses facilities and homes designed to serve people with disabilities Child Care Facilities single room occupancy housing residential units smaller than 750 square feet affordable housing or publicly supported housing that meets certain definitions emergency and transitional shelters for people experiencing homelessness and

56:35 domestic violence shelters so for those uses even those that may occur outside of that half a mile we are not allowed to require any on-site parking Cindy could you go back to the map for a second so I had a question and you can't I don't know that you can see the shading in this so when you look the map that I have in the packet has got is got its shaded is within half a mile along sort of Westy as you get out towards the path and I want to make sure I'm reading this correctly is that by the way the map looks is that sort of in scope for these parking standards because of the uh because of the frequent Transit line that's on Franklin even though there's no access point

57:22 Okay so so we it's really draw draw with a uh with a broad brush right that we have areas that are not actually accessible to a Transit line in the city that would be in scope for this yeah I looked to Christina to see how she has any detail on that or this part um we may be able to remove that area specifically because we can use either walking distance or straight line distance but one of the nuances is that we're not allowed to use walking distance to actually get onto the bus lines we're not allowed to measure walking distance from stops we have to measure walking distance from the corridor so even if there's not an existing stop

58:08 um so not for West D but for other parts of Springfield there may not be a stop within a half mile but if you can get to the corridor like you can watch if you're half mile from being able to watch the bus go by okay um then then that has to be included so we may be able to fine-tune some of that on the other where the river is a natural barrier but that half mile is going to grab a lot from them from Pioneer Parkway so it's a little bit there is a little bit of that area that maybe it will come off and this was a draft map it was really just like locked it put down some blobs around um those corridors so when we do the Precision part it's gonna it's gonna refine itself perfect Corey so and I might be jumping ahead but I you I just want I just want to sit for a minute um because the the the no mandates for

58:55 affordable units Child Care Facilities units for people with disabilities shelters that just as you all know because I've already just oh that just doesn't sit well with me because you have got folks who um it just it's just the impact on folks who are um have less income is going to be bigger than folks who have more which is not Equity but um on the next page it says that this does not directly affect accessible parking so what is the what is the explanation around the um facilities for people with disabilities but there still are some federal mandates for accessible parking so how how does that live in the same sure lots of speed so

59:41 um the number of accessible parking spaces that you need to provide is a percentage of the total so if a developer is providing 10 parking spaces then a percentage I think it's around probably in that case would be one space would need to be required to be Ada accessible so these if you even though the city is not requiring parking people may still provide on-site parking and so at least one and then depending on how many you provide of those parking spaces need to be Ada accessible but setting no minimums they could choose to do no parking correct should mean no accessibility parking okay

1:00:27 say that out loud and and that point was raised during the rulemaking and that they are aware of that it's also causing some issues with ODOT um as well odat is like that we may look for rule revisions there or that may be an issue that gets sorted out in litigation but it is a point of them was raised during the rulemaking process thank you Joe I think the standard you're talking about is one in 25 spaces if there's 25 spaces one must be handicapped and must be so many feet wide Etc yeah then they they I think they rot down a little bit when you get to like hundreds of parking spaces their standards are different but generally that's about the standard 125. so but also and Corey brings up an excellent point which was already stirring around in my brains

1:01:12 in regards to accessible parking and um ADA requirements in regards to landlords now you have a person that for example and just like a person with a service animal you can't discriminate against sprinting to that person Etc based on no animal policies Etc that's one thing but now let's go back to a person that's disabled and depends upon a wheelchair and so can you deny can you tell that person no or you can rent here but you can't park here because you can't be mobile here because it doesn't allow for that so will the landlord now be open for lawsuit or open for litigation based on this Rule and how will this will the city protect the landlord property owner

1:01:58 or what I'm not sure I understand the question well you're talking about ADA accessibility and you have your property owner and you rent that property right you say you're one of the properties that say ho no part no parking spot was built here I I bought this property after this rule comes into effect the developer built a place with no parking places now I've got some rental open openings run an application say Okay I want some renters and oh I have a person who's got a disability that depends upon Mobility I got you I can't provide that now because of this law so there is there protections for the landlord from litigation well I

1:02:43 think in that case the law would be indoor indirectly um leading to that result because it would have been the private property of the pr the predecessor's decision not to provide parking nothing would necessarily prevent a property owner from adding parking later um this would be required to though that's what I'm saying they couldn't be required to so I think that unfortunately would just be something that the subsequent property owner would have to figure out I don't know the answer to that I don't think the city would be liable um we do just as an aside we do sign on street if we if there's on street parking provided then people can go through a process with operations to play paint a blue curb or to mark on street parking as Ada it doesn't mean it's reserved for a resident like a particular resident right but it but we

1:03:28 can and have signed Ada on street parking when it's adjacent to under parked residential development but I'm not sure that there's really any protection for a landlord in a situation that you're that you're talking about but I also don't think there's liability for this I'm not really assuming that there would be some liability I'm just bringing the point up what thoughts would go through people's heads and and you have this the same problem when you have developers and I've always and everybody knows that I'm a pro developer I mean Pro building I'm all for that always have been but now there's a place where there's a spot here where the developers see this and they're going to look at this and say this is this is a cash cow for them this is going to be pretty amazing for them to be able to build without having the expense of parking so now I'm Going

1:04:14 On The Other Side by saying so are we making it is it you know at the at the expense of of climate Equity thing or whatever it is to provide really providing some huge economic benefit to developers which we say we want to make some development but now what kind of aftermath are we creating what kind of wake are we creating behind us into livability for all persons and how are we going to how other people are people looking at those problems into the future what what the ramifications can be to the city well I think we're starting to think about what those ramifications would be so even if we take um when we get to the options um the

1:05:00 simplest option there will be ramifications no matter what option we choose on for phase two there will be ramifications well so Leonard if you why don't you go and then we'll try to get our back on track to the to the actual options I can be brief on it um so I when when I first heard about this program and that we were considering a lawsuit against it I I kept hearing it was an unfunded mandate and now looking at these parking rules and the the phase one parking rules it looks to me like it's mostly preventing us from enforcing a mandate is that accurate option one would be um that we wouldn't we wouldn't enforce parking managed

1:05:46 so I'm I'm struggling with how this is going to be a great expense to the city the rules are 136 pages of different topics and this is one of those topics so in this area it prevents us from enforcing a parking mandate but the cup the rules as a whole cover um you know 136 pages of content and some of those are mandates on the city to do I was just asking about this part this this would be less expensive for the city right it depends on which option you choose well it so Leonard I think you're there's three particular options you're just talking about the first uh the first phase which is hey specifically in specific areas you can't you right you

1:06:31 can't come up with parking mandates when we get into sort of option two and option three we're we're going to choose things that are going to cost money okay I mean I get it one one thing at a time but I'm just making a general observation about these rules yes okay Corey I think part of part of the unfunded part is how much sort of time and staff and all of that that it's going to take to do the things I mean you're right if we say we're not going to enforce them it's not going to cost us any money it's probably it's going to impact the livability of folks who live in Spring live and work and play and all that in Springfield but I mean I get what you're saying I'm happy to answer questions about the lawsuit outside of the meeting um and and to share more information

1:07:16 about the basis for the appeal make sure Leonard will why don't you call Christine later uh it's it's a lot more complicated than that but all right Cory are you done I sorta yeah go ahead we're going to try to hold you know hold our questions until we get to the hard part because that's coming in a couple of slides Sandy so these rules do not retroactively apply to existing development they only apply to new development or Redevelopment um a developer as I said could still provide parking on site even though the city would not require it they do not interfere with our existing parking maximums

1:08:02 um and we've talked about the Ada so for phase one staff is proposing that we would approve applications for new development or Redevelopment that meet the criteria that are submitted after December 31st um we would provide internal staff training to our counter-stop and the development review team as to what these new rules are and we would not um per staff recommendation undertake any code amendments at this time and so developers and staff would refer to the state's rules unless um until later on and at some point in the future may we we may decide to amend our development code to recognize the

1:08:48 state's rules for phase two um where is sorry where where phase one was targeted on the transit corridors and specific uses phase two applies Citywide um and the state has provided some options for the implementation of phase two so what we are calling option one is the do-nothing approach this option would require the elimination of all parking minimums Citywide options two and three would allow the city to keep some of our existing parking regulations but we would have to make modifications and add new requirements in programming so options two and three would require

1:09:35 significant code amendments funding and Staffing which I will detail a little bit more in future slides the extent and complexity of these rules make them difficult to understand and fully grasp the implications of implementation and so I can't say that all of the options under or all of the nuances of options two and three we fully understand or know that they are fully legal um so this slide is provided by the state to outline um what we have before us and then I'm going to take you into a little bit more detail in choosing a pathway

1:10:22 so Sandy just could you say that one more time if you know option one is probably legal but you don't know that all parts of option two and option three are legal correct specifically option two I don't believe the state has provided us with any legal analysis on whether some of the options there are within local government legal Authority related to the legislature for example from the state right yes again we are appealing these roles um for some of the options some of the Sandy we'll get into this option two is like a pick three out of five and we don't know if all five of those would stand up to Legal challenge if we were

1:11:07 appealed on the basis of other state statutes okay so and we haven't done that I I just haven't had time to do that no no this is us chuckling about like the enigma wrapped in a contradiction which this conversation is so if we choose if if we choose an option tonight right we're going to assume that the right like more information could come come up in the next couple of weeks and that that would help clarify what we're supposed to do right so okay if you choose option two or three I think that that would mean staff would go back do some more homework consult with other jurisdictions who are also struggling with some of these same questions and come back with you to you with more information if if you just to go down

1:11:53 either option two or option three okay that and that's the best we're going to be able to do right now that's perfect okay yep so let's keep going next slide um so again this encapsulates some option one is the do nothing approach would result in no minimum parking requirements Citywide so we would take um staff recommends that we take an approach similar to what I had recommended for phase one in which we would just refer people to the Statewide rules and provide developers and staff the applicable resources to approve the applications even if the applicant does not include the on-site parking that is required by our code uh so if Council directs us to follow option one the already adopted parking maximums

1:12:39 would remain in place but the minimums would no longer apply options two and three are a little bit more involved and require additional regulations and programming um so if we do choose option two or three we would need to start work on those immediately Joe so I I mean for ease of making things happy and friendly and easy for everyone option one sounds great however option twos and threes bring up some very very important points to me but the hesitation of whether they're legal or not

1:13:24 brings up a big thing inside of me so if I have got this clear you're asking us to look at Option One but also asking us to make a decision based on two and three without all the information no are you comfortable with option one if not then which of the which does option two or option three look better to you do you have a preference at this point or do you need more information and what other information would that be to make a decision on option two or three I mean I like some of the some of these points in option two and three for example the reduced parking burdens reduced mandates

1:14:10 based on shared parking solar panels EV charging car sharing parking space availability et cetera those those standards to me if we can have any change or any flexibility there and those options two and three provide that flexibility why would I want to shut that door now so with option one we would have no parking mandate anywhere so we would all of this would be covered under option one I would also say that we do currently have reductions for required parking based on shared parking um on-street parking garage parking we don't necessarily have standards related to solar panels AV charging

1:14:57 um right but we do have very flexible um reduction policies that the council adopted under the right size parking reductions so essentially any good evidence that someone brings in that they should have to get do less parking than what the code minimum is staff can approve less parking then well and I'm Not For Less parking sorry so so does every part of this document that you've provided this these options are they is there any part of it that we're going Beyond which the state is shoving down our throats I know you already mentioned today that that some of our standards are beyond what these are right so so is any part of this new document no no no this document is only what is

1:15:46 strictly mandated by the rules under the under the options when we um when the city did the tsp code implementation project from 2016 to 2020 there were sort of we had policy there are policies on the Springfield tsp that are written with nearly identical policy language as the goal of the climate-friendly Equitable communities rules the council during that you'll remember that extensive process oh yeah made trade-offs and said well we like this thing we don't want to do this and and kind of found that balance um so in finding that balance for Springfield there were some ways that our current code is stricter than we would have to be under the cfec rules and and less strict in other ways but these slides only represent what would be mandated to do to be in compliance

1:16:32 with the c-sec rules depending on the option the council takes Damien I guess okay a couple questions but so I guess my first thing so with point one or option one does it mean that somebody can a developer can decide to have zero parking spots where they can have two or three per unit I mean what we're saying like that that they can have none or they can have more than the state recommends is that is that true so for residential dwelling we do not currently have any parking maximums so as you say the developer could provide zero one two five however many parking spaces that developer wanted to provide per unit they would have that choice

1:17:21 while meeting the density requirements typically or for certain properties okay another question that that I have I mean I'm just curious about and I can lift this up on my own but you know I hear things like shared parking and street parking and just based on where I live there is so-called street parking but what it does it limits the view uh to where when you pull out you can easily get hit and I've always seen you know multiple potential accidents and things like that and and I mean our our infrastructure our streets aren't aren't wide enough to have this street parking and and so to me it it can be a safety issue and so I'm just curious what the street parking even mean because I've seen people Park in all kinds of spots because there is no parking in apartment complexes it

1:18:08 just seems like me the people who are making these decisions or providing these options are people who are comfortable here who live in houses uh or who don't have an accessibility to park an issue and so I'm just a little I don't know I mean I'm a little taken back by the the state of Oregon in general not loving parking but then also not increasing mass transit and I think there are greater issues uh that we need to look at because I mean right now I don't think I can make a decision because I just think that there's so many other things that people aren't thinking about and if we're going to look at this from the bigger picture angle then I don't see how we can even make a decision or even think about this because there's so many missing pieces as far as I'm concerned

1:18:58 yeah I well said Damien um so I think we got a couple more slides and I know we're all trying to dive into what direction to give so let's just if we can just hold it together and let Sandy get through the next couple of slides we can dive into trying to figure out some direction here so you can go ahead I think they've had a chance to look at that one so this one um this is option two and so these are parking management policies and you would choose three out of the five you could unbundle parking for residential units so unbundle means that the landlord would charge separately for the parking that is on site from the rental unit um you could do that for both residential and Commercial

1:19:44 um there could be a flexible commute benefit for businesses in which um if there are businesses with more than 50 employees they would be able to compensate those who do not come to work in their own vehicle um and that's like to offset the cost of providing the on-site parking that they do provide for the other employees you could tax the revenue on parking lots and this is the one of the those questionable policies that's being discussed amongst other cities as to is this even really legal um and you could require no more than half a parking space per unit in multi-family development for in those areas where we still have the option of requiring some

1:20:30 on-site that that's required no more right I mean that number five there right they could still provide more if the developer wanted to provide more so I've got a question about unbundling parking under the way the rules are written right if I was a developer I could unbundle like I could sure that would allow me to sort of charge the current rent that I have and then generate additional revenue for renting you know I guess on-site parking right and there's not a requirement in the law that would would allow you to over require that somebody reduce their rents to sort of compensate like I'm you know because they're sort of now financing it right okay so

1:21:17 all right and we would have to if you picked that up one of those one of those um as one of the three we would have to require that all units had that um that all parking spaces and all units had that um requirement and I do not know to preempt the question that some of you may be thinking I do not know how Ada factors into that um and I do not know whether there's there would be a federally the federal law would require an exception for Ada parking spaces or if we would be required to enforce a policy that requires residents who need disabled parking spaces to also pay market rate for those spaces I don't know the answer to that question if it's one you're thinking I think we're all thinking a lot of questions you know and I and I'm reading

1:22:02 that thinking about how you know rent burdens on our households that rent in the city as well so Leonard and then we'll go back to Corey yeah well I I'm just looking at the three out of the five and can we be I mean uh Ada aside can we very be fairly sure that all five of those would be legal to adapt no no we just don't we don't know what three we don't know which I guess we would say I don't know which three I specifically am not sure of the legality on a sales tax on parking lot Revenue um or what are the legal mechanisms I guess the more specific to be more specific I don't know what the legal mechanism is um to do that lawfully in the state of Oregon um it and I don't know of any we were not able to find any other city in the

1:22:48 state of Oregon that has has done that to look to as a model which is typically how new Revenue generating programs get sort of implemented as you look to the city that's done that first yeah well it just seems to me that until we can ascertain the legality of all of this that it would be uh we we'd be delinquent in proceeding right now of course um I appreciate Damien saying that we don't have enough information to make a decision however I know that that's my job is to make a decision um so uh I I'm gonna support staff's recommendation for number one but I just want to go on record one more time of saying that this is this really until it

1:23:34 gets fixed is really just exacerbating the inequities of who can afford who can afford a place where they have parking who can't afford electric vehicles who can't afford to pay extra parking who can't afford and who can is able-bodied enough to be able to walk a half mile or a half mile plus to a to a a bus station and like Damien said you know we've got people pushing back really hard against in investing in the infrastructure of mass transit while we're doing this I just want to say until we fix it I will go with one okay hang on let's letter top finish the one slide and then we'll get into it so I'll put you down for a inside yes all right for a reluctant one

1:24:21 so option three is to reduce parking and create a parking one or more parking districts so um in this case there would be a variety of specific uses for which we could not require on-site parking um small sites vacant buildings Studios and one bedroom units historic buildings leader Oregon reach code developments um we would not be able to require additional parking when there are changes of use redevelopments or expansions of over 30 percent um we would have to adopt parking maximums again we already have some we'd have to look to see if we need to adopt some more um and there would be no parking allowed

1:25:07 to be required parking could be allowed but we couldn't require it for any place within a half a mile walking distance of the climate-friendly areas and we would need to designate a District to manage the on-street residential parking so basically um at this point what staff is here for just to reiterate is for that where we have an option which would be implemented at the end of June meaning we need to decide now if we're going to go for option two or three to be able to get the rules ready to be adopted and in place by end of June are you interested in learning more about option two or three

1:25:54 um and if so what interests you there or are you comfortable going with staff's recommendation of option one Joe so I'm looking at where you came up with the title option one or main option two and option three now I see an option two that if you do the unbundled parking if someone wants to develop a apartment complex and put a parking garage across the alley for the tenants but he can charge he can sell those buildings independently for whoever wants to buy them is that correct yeah I'm not sure where you're going yet well I'm leading you so we have that I mean that's the crazy option on there and we also have the option of taxing parking et cetera and then we go to option three which has got other

1:26:39 nuances to it so what this one says reduce parking and parking district and the other one is parking management policies so is that part uh was that ciphered out of the state mandate meaning this can only be in this AJ could you go back to the the this slide that has that graph I guess what I'm saying is is that the state that state mandate create something to where the cities would have okay if you want to not do this these are what you have to look at the state basically said repeal all your parking mandates or if you don't want to do that you have to either comply with one rule or the other Rule and you have

1:27:24 to pick between them and the one rule which is option two says pick three out of five of these okay and you comply there um and you will what's not noted here is that when it's time to designate climate friendly areas if we have not repealed parking mandates either city-wide or for those climate-friendly areas there will be additional requirements in the climate-friendly areas that we'll have to figure out how to comply that can be a separate decision because that repeat that for the climate friendly areas but there's another layer even but that deadline isn't approaching as quickly so it's so it's basically they said if you didn't repeal all your parking mandates or not enforce your parking mandates then you have to pick between two options and we're calling them option two and option

1:28:09 three and option two is policies new policies and then option three is as applied to Springfield based on geography and uses it's really just limiting it to most meaningfully we could continue to control parking requirements for most residential areas or many I would say most but many residential areas and some Industrial Development but almost all of our commercial um area would not would fall under um the restriction on any parking mandate so we would have effectively no parking mandates under option three except for some Industrial Development and some residential development it's a point I'm making or trying to understand or grasp is that if the state

1:28:54 came up with these options for us meaning okay if you don't want to do this you've got this option or this option that's what I'm hearing but I also heard from the same people that these may not be legal but that's the list that the state gave us so yeah the nuances that state agencies can't contradict State Legislative statute and these rules came from a state agency and we are not sure that it was vetted in terms of whether or how I guess it's more of how these options would be lawful under State Statute so I don't and I can do that if you're interested in learning more about option two I can do that research and try to come up with some guidance on that but if the council was interested was you

1:29:39 know very interested in just option one um then we would not dedicate staff time to doing that research because it wouldn't be um influencing the council's decision but if you feel that it would influence your decision I'm very happy to dig into that further and do some more research on those on those requirements the state just didn't the state agency that adopted these rules didn't provide us with any guidance on how yeah guidance or legal basis or the theories or or model programs or ordinances to implement these so we have to do that research ourselves at this point well the heart the only part that I mean I'm I'm not trying to I'm sorry I'm being a pain here but I got some real issues with this but that but I'm trying

1:30:24 to get at is is okay we got these managed from the state I only buy them I only want to be part of a decision that is the least onerous on our public and which includes the citizens and which includes how people are parking how they can park are are people with disabilities the which which impacts the the least negative impact to those are people is the option I want and if option one is negatively impacting some of these smaller communities of disabled folks Etc even people that are building properties and laughing to the bank because they don't have to put parking in there to take care of our citizens then you know what you know what I'm saying that's my quandary is that I want

1:31:09 to make sure what's whatever their decision I'm making or being part of is is going to be the the most beneficial to the citizens and not staff does that make sense yes okay that makes a lot of sense well it it seems to me that this might be a time to apply Occam's razor I mean we have several outcomes eraser all right okay yeah I'll I'll back up a little bit um when when you have three different possible paths forward um and they might all have the same result you go with the simplest one and that's where option one is right now but it's not the same result that's the problem well it could be though well you

1:31:56 know and I think that's well could we back up a second could somebody explain one more time what a parking Management District is I can try to do that I think it's similar to what we have downtown already um where you're limiting um the amount of time that people can be parked there could be permits involved so um you're trying to manage the public asset in a more Equitable way so it would be fair to say that if I that if we went with option three right there would be no parking requirements for any commercial district and then we would have at least one residential parking District out there

1:32:41 where we would have no parking requirements for new development and then if you parked on the street that we would have some sort of management you'd have to probably get a permit I think that parking residential parking District would be a parking District where we issue permits for on-street parking and not uh wouldn't be related to the mandates for the private parking side of things what I'm not sure of is whether our existing parking program through downtown I don't believe our existing parking program for downtown qualifies for either the parking benefit District or as a residential parking District so it would have to be either a modification of that program or a new program to meet that requirement okay so I think here here's my my opinion I

1:33:28 think option three seems a little too like a little too cute by half um I the question I have about option one really the two concerns I have are the first one is the the question about ADA right because I think that's a real question that we have to get answered before we you know before we figure out how to go forward the second question that I have is when I think about the city if we went with option one we don't have Transit service to every part in the city and it is not there are parts of the city that are not close to um not close to a Transit line at all and I would be concerned about creating sort of islands of where people don't have either a car they don't have an accident you know maybe there's not bike and pet infrastructure out there right like there's a predominant of issues that

1:34:15 would be related to just sort of throwing the uh you know throwing the gate wide open on this so I think I have that set of questions before I could tell you whether or not I would I guess comfortable would be the wrong term here but that we could start down that option one category on the flip side I think understanding some the legality and the pluses and minuses a little bit about option two would probably be helpful to us um because I you know that way we could sort of find some sort of balance here um because I just don't know that we have enough information is the council interested in all five of those potential option Twos for example the one that I'm most concerned about is the sales tax on parking lot Revenue um is that an option the council is interested in exploring because if the

1:35:00 council isn't interested in exploring that option even if you went with option two then I won't research it but I will research it if the council is interested in learning more about that specifically Steve two things one is you mentioned no there's not enough transit in Springfield there's lots of money for buses out there but the labor cost drivers for those buses is what is killing it right now I don't know how we're going to address that but that's a big deal and the other is the main goal of this is to reduce our use of automobiles and it used to be a long range but right now it's short range we're trying to make it happen very quickly and this this is the process they're forcing us into to do that um okay so I'm looking around and I see I'm not seeing anybody interested in a sales tax on on on parking um do we or

1:35:47 is it really these five or is it or do we have an option to craft something else oh there is no other option that is pickle pick three of those five okay no there's no further this is supposed to be ample flexibility okay um okay it is just those five there is no other or something similar that would have an equal effect or burden on us to come up with it um under either option this is it yeah my concern about the list on option two is there's some of those that could cause people to pay more rent and and I'm really concerned about that um but that that doesn't mean but I think that knowing that ADA option that ADA question would be would be an important one to figure out how to how

1:36:32 to craft this does anybody have other go ahead one more comment sorry plenty of them tonight sorry but we talk about Equity Equitable housing and what the state is doing and what we're actually being forced to be part of is alienating an entire part of our community that kind of can't afford more and creating a some sort of Shangri-La with less carbon and less gas and less vehicles that is not obtainable for people with lower incomes and now we're all sudden we get this we're part of some sort of thing that's going to create this even greater Chasm between almost classes of people and it is

1:37:17 really as you can tell it's very irritating to me so I mean I'm sorry we're not I mean it's just not gonna make money off this it's not going to be it's follow the follow the flipping dollar and it's just ridiculous and and it sickens me to be part of this part of a decision that that creates even more of that problem so but yeah I that 88 thing I would definitely need to be like to have answered I do want to clarify one of the reasons that staff recommends option one um it that we essentially take a hands-off approach in a way one of the reasons I recommend that to Sandy um is because we are appealing these rules for the reasons that the council

1:38:04 has highlighted because not because we're opposed to doing the work to figure out how to make our community more climate friendly but because it requires the council to do it in a way that may not actually result in a more climate-friendly Springfield or may adversely impact Springfield from an equity perspective and if you take option one the one of the benefits of that approach is that leaves our code intact as it is now and so if a court does in the future grant us more flexibility to figure out how to implement this in a way that does work for Springfield there are not programs or requirements that need to be Unwound we can start from the code as it exists today and so just to give a little bit of that contact I'm not sure if that was as clear from the memo

1:38:49 um and so that's one of the reasons we could certainly if you want to take option two or three unwind those or alter them or modify them um to better match Springfield if the state gives us that opportunity to do that but it would probably be easier from a regulatory and legal perspective to do that if you if you chose option one um go ahead and they might might and and you mentioned that too and I frankly would like Springfield to be known not for being climate friendly but for being everybody friendly first as a priority and the climate can take second seat as far as I'm concerned so any of these rules that make put people second I'm not I don't support so I'm just

1:39:36 throwing it out there sorry so let me turn the question kind of or I guess the kind of a a statement about where I'm going with option one and I know from a staff work perspective that option one is the easiest if there's a way to get to option one like and adopt something that would protect you know if we get you know we get sort of forced down this path that would sort of protect an ADA requirement that could be that would be appealable to me you know would be interesting to me I did look at the definition of parking mandate and there is there is language in the rule that says um a parking mandate doesn't include Ada parking space requirements so it may so we may have some some work around there

1:40:22 to have potentially have the council adopt something that references a requirement to provide Ada parking it may be then that the only parking that gets constructed for certain developments is marked Ada spots I think logically we can see that that may become an enforcement nightmare it may not you know we may see a lot of a lot more um people parking in Ada spots without placards um which is you know it takes additional enforcement resources to respond to those calls it is the city um Police Department community resource officers that respond to those um but that may be an option I think we can look at that figure out if other cities what other cities are doing as they're trying to Grapple with these rules um and and figure out where those options are around Ada

1:41:08 um for the parking mandates um as well as if you took the unbundled parking approach how Ada May factor into that yeah and that would be perfect all right doesn't any do you guys have enough Direction here so I want to clarify it are you looking at all three options at this point or have we eliminated any I I think three's done like I don't see any interest around three so we're looking at option two with more information yeah yeah right so which one which ones have you know potential legal issues maybe some pluses in my like some you know some pluses and minus is to each one of those to just help us gauge some of this um and then the question about about ADA sure let's raise out go ahead Joe thank you

1:41:56 it's a lot of work and and I appreciate that all right anybody else before we switch topics the climate friendly is not going to be known for on-time meetings I do I do want to say thank you for our staff I know where you see a lot of frustration from us and that is clearly pointed at the state that is not pointed at the work the staff's doing so thank you for being patient with us and walking us through this and at least laughing at our jokes all right last item for the evening SDC waiver to encourage affordable home ownership with no parking parking all right um good evening everyone thanks for sticking with it uh

1:42:42 my name is Katie Carroll and I'm the city's housing analyst um so the item I have for you tonight is consideration of a program to waive system development charges or sdcs for affordable home ownership housing so for the benefit of any members of the public who might still be listening in um system development charges or sdcs are charges that are imposed on development to accumulate funding needed to provide sufficient capacity and infrastructure for that development so the city collects these for stormwater local Wastewater and transportation so a program to waive SDC charges means that the city would be collecting fewer funds for capital projects in those areas waving sdcs can be a way to incentivize

1:43:29 types of development that might not otherwise happen by reducing The Upfront cost of doing that development and in the case of affordable homeownership housing it can be a way to reduce the price for to help developers reduce the price for income qualified households trying to purchase that housing so a little bit of background on this in May Council provided direction to staff to design a program to do this and then in September uh staff reviewed sorry not staff Council reviewed some draft guidelines for the program and provided feedback to staff and then also gave some additional direction to staff to return with information on the city's SDC revenues so that council could try and figure out how to cap this program

1:44:15 so tonight I'm first going to give a quick overview of the draft guidelines as they are in your packet tonight which have been updated based on that direction in September and then I'll go over the city's SDC revenues and staff's recommendation for capping the program and then I have two questions for Council foreign so um the draft program guidelines so again this is a program that's targeted towards affordable homeownership so it would not apply to affordable rental housing based on council's Direction this would be offered um anyone could apply for it so both non-profit and private developers could apply housing units granted a waiver would have to be affordable for a period of at

1:45:00 least five years and then any housing unit receiving the waiver would have to be sold to households earning no more than 80 percent of the area median income and that was based on council's Direction last meeting as well and then finally also based on council's Direction the program would be offered under two compliance Pathways to minimize Administration and so those compliance pathways are basically two different ways that someone could be found eligible for the waiver which would have different requirements and determine whether it was given as a grant or a forgivable loan and there are more details on that particular one in both the draft program guidelines and then there's an additional attachment that I think I called the compliance pathway explanation document that's in

1:45:45 your packet tonight okay so moving on to the city's SDC revenues um so what this chart is showing are the city's SDC revenues over the last six fiscal years um and this is broken out by those three different funds that we collect sdc's in so the largest portion of revenues has gone towards local Wastewater and that's represented between 71 and 79 of Revenue collected every year and then the smallest portion has gone towards stormwater um the average revenue over these last six fiscal years has been four million seven hundred thirty two thousand seven hundred eighty eight dollars but as you

1:46:30 can see the last two fiscal years Revenue has been um notably higher Staff does think this trend uh will continue for at least a couple more years given residential projects like Marcola Meadows so can I ask a clarifying question that's excluding the parks right correct so these are just City SDC so that's also not mwmc's okay perfect thank you okay and so um I wanted to give you all an idea of how a waiver program might impact the city's SDC funds um so if Council will remember at our last discussion on this I mentioned um habitat for humanities Fisher Village project so that is an affordable

1:47:16 homeownership project that habitat is currently working on in Springfield that will add 12 single unit dwellings for purchase by income qualified households when it's done so based on the sdc's habitat has already paid four units in this project staff is estimating that if habitat were to apply and be found eligible for a waiver the city could wave up to a hundred thousand dollars for um St in sdcs for the remaining units in that project so I took that hundred thousand dollars and then based on the percentage that habitat has already paid to each of those funds for its permitted units kind of broke that hundred thousand dollars out so council could see um how that might impact those different

1:48:02 fund areas and then I'll just point out that that yellow slice of the pie is for administration so for units that have already been permitted habitat paid just under five percent of what the total they paid went towards Administration and then I think there was a question from Council last time about a technology fee um the city does not collect a technology fee for sdcs foreign so staff's recommendation for this program is to cap the waiver at three hundred thousand dollars or three years whichever uh comes first and staff's not recommending that Council sets uh sort of a per year maximum within that like

1:48:48 up to a hundred thousand dollars per year so how this would work is that when either the three hundred thousand dollars was waived or the three years had been reached whichever one of those came sooner uh that would stop the program and trigger a check-in with Council to figure out should this program continue and if so are any adjustments needed to the program guidelines and so some of the reasoning behind staff's recommendation here so if we were to waive about a hundred thousand dollars a year over those three years that would represent around two percent of that average amount that we've collected over the last six years so the 4.734 approximately um stops not recommending setting kind of the per year limit within that to

1:49:34 provide a little bit of additional flexibility to developers about when they would apply and given sort of the short three-year period um the impact to the city's SDC funds would not be significantly different to do at this time Joe thank you I appreciate the information that you provided in this packet and I've read every bit of it and it made a lot of sense and answered a lot of my questions and I appreciate that very much I'm glad I I support the proposal of three hundred thousand dollars or three years whichever comes first and I also understand that if we put it at 100 you know something so much per year that

1:50:19 that could remove some of the flexibility in this program so I wouldn't want to do that um but I would want to see what kind of impact it is and it I mean as far as I don't want to see this go into perpetuity I would like to give this a shot and see what happens without the expectation that this is something that's going to go every three years or some sort of renewal thing or whatever I need it we got to do this program take a look at it then if it is a great program and it really did do some very good things then I would be totally willing to look at again but but I like the 300 000 and I guess the three of the three year thing almost doesn't matter but but three years if it's if it's not used up in three years then it's time to go on

1:51:05 to another project and and end it wonder if I could respond to some thought behind the three-year piece I think it's also an opportunity to evaluate if we're not getting applications is there a way that we need to change the guidelines or or trash the whole idea all right Leonard oh we spent a lot of time hashing this out and I mean I think it was a good compromise and we go to the next slide AJ um so it sounds like we're getting some discussion on that first question but just want to flag that second question as well if Council has any further feedback on the draft guidelines um because I think staff's hope would be after this meeting that we could return with updated guidelines based on any

1:51:51 additional Direction and then a resolution does anybody have any uh additional feedback um I think we're we're good to go here I would just ask that we continue to monitor conversations at the state level I know programs like this are beginning to come up in other cities and um you know there may be you know an opportunity to engage in either legislation or see whatever uh what other folks are are thinking about um because the these types of programs are a big discussion point we've given a direction and you've done a good job of following thank you thank you everyone all right thank you that was the last item so we are going to adjourn for the evening have a good night everybody