Springfield City Council — February 27, 2023

0:06 I'm going to call the Springfield City Council work session the order with Oracle mayor Ben Gordons here concerns Weber here Bradley here Doyle here and missionary here thank you all right we've got lots of meetings tonight for the work session we only have two items which first one is update on implementation of the climate friendly and Equitable communities rulemaking process hi Sandy good evening mayor and Council my name is Sandy Belton but before I get started I'm going to ask Christina Evans to give you a quick update and I apologize that I'm sitting behind most of you I've seen a crowd assistant at the attorney's office just wanted to update you that we are still in the sorry you want to come to the table chair right next to school

0:52 I don't know sorry about that um we are still litigating these rules um for those of you that were not on the council when the litigation began in late 2022 we are asking the court of appeals to review the legality of the rules and the way they were adopted that work litigation is still underway we should be done with briefing by the end of April and we would really hope for a decision sometime in 2023 from the court of appeals it's being reviewed in an expedited process but we don't really know what the outward timeline is on when they could issue a decision so all of that to say the advice that you continue to figure out how to implement them with the dates provided and the rules um still stands and I believe in April once you have are

1:37 you bringing this back an executive session Maybe not maybe wrong um I will bring it back an executive session once we have more information on the briefing um but I don't have a date exactly set for that so that's my nice way to say that you know we will get an opportunity to talk to talk specifically about the litigation not the night not here coming up all right well thank you I'm the comprehensive planning manager and helping me on this project are Sophie McGinley with parking Molly markarian with the climate friendly areas and Drew Larson with the scenario planning um so there are four topics and two questions tonight

2:29 so these rules um include a wide-ranging set of requirements for metropolitan areas and the city is mandated to comply with the rules that affect Community engagement land use and transportation the cfec rules aim to reduce carbon emitted by vehicles and then to increase Equity during Community engagement and when providing housing and transportation choices um the cpec rules are broad reaching and complex they are the changing the basis for land use and transportation in the metropolitan areas of Oregon is too early still to fully understand the full implications and effectiveness of the rules

3:17 um comprehensive planning staff are working to implement these and um we're going to start off with a first topic on parking so phase one of the parking rules is in effect that went into effect at the end of December and in that phase we are requiring no on-site parking within half of Mile uh MX round 11 and for certain housing and some other types of uses um at the end of March uh we will be requiring additional conduit for electric vehicles for multi-family housing so that 40 of the spaces have that conduitency to support um electric charging last fall in work session Council gave

4:03 direction for phase two of the parking and Council directed that we move forward with eliminating parking minimums Citywide so at the end of the year we had that information out to the public we then requested an extension from dlcd which they granted the department of land conservation and development is dlcd um and so we have until the end of this year 2023 to actually Implement phase two of the parking requirements so when I was before Council last fall a lot of a couple times a lot of discussion around accessible parking and ADA compliance and so we did some more

4:49 research on that and what we have learned um is that in order to require any Ada parking spaces if the developer is not going to otherwise provide parking on site and we need to adopt that requirement into our development code so under Ada and Oregon State law if there is no off-street parking spaces provided for the general population then you don't need to provide anything basis uh so my first question for you tonight is should Springfield include a requirement for one Ada parking space when no on-site parking is otherwise provided as part of the package of code amendments that are required to comply

5:34 with the parking requirements so should I continue or you want it as far as are you guys ready to discuss this item or you guys want to go through all the questions and then Circle back isn't that a federal FDA whatever it is requirement you only needed to to provide Ada parking if you're providing parking at all you're not providing any parking and you don't need to provide Ada so the question is I mean unless we adopt something into our code then we could repair one space so all right any uh any other I guess comments or opinions here so well it sounds pretty heartless but

6:20 if the state doesn't care then I don't see us requiring it because that would be hugely onerous on every single thing we have developed from here on forward and what is the percentage of you so they'll do it of the potential the percentage of use those spots how often are Ada spots taken or what percentage of the time and is that a good use to the property and I would say well if we're going to have dense housing we need to have room for the footprint of a deli so it's very sad really sad but if there's not a state requirement then I don't see how we should be requiring things of Builders when we don't have that requirement to do so just like many other things that we don't require we don't really we should not be requiring things that it's not

7:05 already required by a higher entity get more restrictive than the state that's my opinion so okay so if the rule is if we implied if we if under the new rules if they provided on-site parking based on the developer then then the Ada requirement is going to kick in so we're really only talking about the scenario that that developers provided no no on-site parking whether or not we won't want you want one spot to hang out there I think that would be that might be impossible to like manage even got one spot sort of hanging out in front of

7:50 you know in front of folks and then without really clear Direction on what to do and like yeah that's not gonna be a real important are they going to keep people off of them yeah yeah and you this is not your final decision there would be a public hearing process with Planning Commission and Council before you actually about the Amendments but just looking for your direction as to what to include in those amendments yeah anybody else have opinions here I agree with your guys's assessment in that one so my question is that if someone who is um disabled or in need of that spot and a developer creates it sounds like a multi-family I was like and they don't put any more things on them then if there's any legal stuff that would go

8:36 between them and the developer would involve the city right correct okay thank you so in so aren't there some Ada spots on street and downtown yes we have a parking management plan in downtown okay people keep going yeah currently we don't require on-site parking in downtown and we do have a parking management plan and so the city does provide on-site I mean on Street Ada parking um our we've discussed this to and um the thought is that we would probably not provide Ada parking on a request basis that could get problematic if there were areas where we

9:23 wanted to develop another parking management plan um like Glenwood for example if there was the need to do that then we would incorporate that type of media aspect to the on-street parking public parking okay thanks for the clarification there Joe so I'm curious then it doesn't sound as though we're required or we're required to place ADA Compliant parking downtown at wreck I think we are but I'll look to Jeff if we have a managed parking plan like downtown we're required to have a certain number of spaces [Music] so the street parking as opposed to parking lot correct so anytime a entity has got a parking plan we have there's a

10:09 requirement to have Ada complaint spots so I think if you're on private property if they put parking they have to meet the requirements for the number of stalls per spaces they replace right on their property in our managed parking plan within the right-of-way we're required to have so many spaces and we haven't fully implemented the downtown Ada spot yet but we have started putting the neighborhood spots and so I recall a state statute these my memory of it indicates that the places that are accessible to the public or open to the public Gifts of ADA spot is not required unless there's at least 25 spaces for parking

10:55 did that go away I don't know what the number is but I know there's a minimum and it just because you only require provide say 10 spaces doesn't mean you're absolved of any Ada spaces it might only be one space right but there was a state statute that indicated that you have to have at least one ADA Compliant spot for every 25 spots I think on screen were like two for 25. the state statute now I don't know what it was or when it changed now that sets out that table is one Ada space for the first 25. and then it goes up in more Ada spaces for more parking spaces after that right and then at some point it gets to a formula where you use uh and then I think it's like two per block

11:41 or something it works out to about two per block perimeter downtown and I don't remember if that was uh based off of a number or just how it applied to Springfield when we calculated it out um but the on-street parking is um we have adopted the or the council I guess through the standard specifications has adopted the public right-of-way um accessibility guidelines as the standard that we use to show ADA compliance in the public right-of-way the tricky area because the state hasn't adopted really clear guidelines so to keep from having to have you know the city engineer interpret everything um we use the What's called the pro AG standards and that's where that on street parking so it's just a different regulatory mechanism then I've had

12:28 parking lots it just is gets bothersome people research and pretty start doing things voluntarily and then we get locked into past practice that's where I don't want us to I don't want the city to get get into that position and that was just kind of figure out if we already in that position yeah and I think where Sandy was mentioning so we're required in downtown because we have a managed parking plan that we have to have Ada spaces because we do manage parking outside in other neighborhoods where we don't have managed parking our plan was not to put Ada spots in so even if a developer were to develop multi-family housing put no parking in we were not planning on because we don't have managed parking spaces much like

13:14 you're saying we're not required to maintain Ada parking things we would not recommend putting Ada parking spaces out there the confidence will come up later okay so I'm hearing moving forward without an ADA requirement in it makes me sad because I grew up with a mother that was disabled and I remember so many times where we would go places and she either couldn't go or we would have to carry her up with her wheelchair to get her in places they didn't there was no requirements we finally feel like we moved to a place where people are just disabled have the ability to have bathrooms that they can get into and things like that and this just kind of seems like a step backwards that with housing and I don't know that they thought about that when they weren't trying to think about this stuff to me it's people that pass these type

13:59 of measures that four cities and forced people that need assistance whatnot they don't they don't have zero or thought and they're thinking about something that's three feet one over three three inches in front of them and here's the way people have to pay and this is where the agencies or entities have to pay because of legislators short-sightedness well okay let's keep going because it's we have a lot of opinions about c-fec rules the next topic is climate friendly areas and I don't have a particular question about that so I'm just going to hit on some high points so we are required to designate climate-friendly areas defined as areas where people can meet most of their daily needs without having to drive

14:44 these areas are intended to become Urban mixed use areas that contain greater than average mix and supply of housing jobs businesses and services and a higher intensity of development the rules outline a two-phase process that includes technical analysis and Community engagement for local governments so the first phase is the study and for that we study and identify potential locations for climate friendly areas and we need to have that done by the end of this calendar year and then the second phase is to adopt the applicable development standards when plan amendments to actually implement the climate-friendly areas so the

15:29 um there is funding for a consultant to help us with the Outreach and that's current and West they've been interviewing Community leaders of underserved populations to better understand their context and help Elevate historically underrepresented communities to inform decision making and approaches for mitigating possible displacement both as part of the climate-friendly areas work as well as future planning and transportation projects so in your pocket I've listed the interview participants thus far there are still going to be a couple more and then some of the key findings that we had from that engagement we are going to request an extension on

16:16 the implementation for the climate friendly areas as part of the broader schedule that I'm going to get to later so that that would better align with our housing Capacity Analysis that is required that we get that done um by the end of 2026 foreign planning um so the consultant is working is contract with felcon right no deal with the LCD okay so what's the what are the other groups that they're going to interview

17:01 um Raven trying to reach some groups without success especially in the Hispanic Latino communities um I think they're still trying to reach out to Bethel School District and I'm not sure who else they're still trying to get a hold of so when it comes to identifying climate friendly areas is I guess when I read this I thought um let me think about my question here are is this the only public Outreach we're doing is the way that cfac is set up you know only sort of to talk to underserved communities no I mean this is the initial stage because we want to take that um into consideration as we develop our

17:46 engagement plan but we don't have our engagement plan compared to as of yet okay so okay so these interviews these interviews are going to sort of inform our actual public engagement plan the public engagement plan is going to you know be the broad net okay okay that's and what is the possibility that that old nodal areas are going to turn back into climate-friendly areas pretty high um yeah I mean that's what we're looking first because that's um the climate friendly areas are pretty much the same type of policy direction as our nodal development areas and so we're looking at those first because that would be the least amount of change um and that people that's what they've

18:31 been planning for that's what they're expecting um so we're asking El Cod to analyze those areas first and see what capacity they have in any other kind of constraints and use that as the starting point I recommend City Center it's going to have the population there for itself and movements all over anybody else right I'm sure this will be completely different because they're not no hilarious they're climate friendly areas now all right let's keep going all right so scenario planning um and this one does include a question for you so the purpose of the

19:17 division 44 Metropolitan greenhouse gas reduction targets components of the CPAC rules is to significantly and as rapidly as possible reduce climate pollutants that are causing climate disruption so this division requires that cities and counties within a metropolitan area prepare a transportation and land use scenario plan that defines and implements a preferred scenario identifies performance measures for tracking progress particularly around greenhouse gas emission and works to not only avoid or mitigate any impacts to underserved populations but to improve outcomes for these communities over time so in our area Central Lane County we completed a scenario plan in 2015. so in

20:04 recognition of the work that's already been done the rules are written that allow this area to build on that preferred scenario from 2015 rather than start over and create a new scenario plan um So within the rules there are some different components of what we're required to come up with by the end of June so these include a work program for implementing the preferred scenario plan that includes a governance structure a proposed governance structure scope of work a community engagement plan funding estimate and a proposed schedule so um the governance structure is where I'm looking for your guidance so this

20:50 governance structure in our case since we already have a scenario plan that we're working from would be providing guidance in the performance measures and setting the target outcomes that we'd like to have so we've been talking about How likely we would have performance measures that would work regionally and in each jurisdiction would set targets relative to what makes sense for each jurisdiction um and then this governance structure would also be overseeing implementation and reviewing work done by the jurisdictions that's me working towards those targets so there are a couple of options that we've talked about that seem to make sense

21:35 for our area and one is to make use of the existing Metropolitan policy committee uh So within the existing structure there are bylaws that allow for consideration of Metropolitan Transportation matters that are not part of the mpo the Metropolitan planning organization which is a federal arm on particularly around the federal funding uh and in that configuration they add LTD Lane Transit District members as voting members um I should say that we're not really sure about Coburg yet so under the rules Coburg could apply to be exempt and not

22:21 have to participate they have not yet um and we haven't had that conversation with Coburg about whether they want to be involved in the scenario planning or not um it's really up to them so we'll be talking with them this spring to see what their thoughts are and that would inform whether they would be at the table as part of this governance structure or not if you didn't um want to do use the existing Metropolitan policy committee we could create a new intergovernmental entity that would be based on some type of a agreement between the local governments and have some role for Lane Transit districts so the question for Council and again

23:07 this is not a final decision we're just looking to put forward a proposed governance structure um that we would submit as part of this work plan to dlcd so what is council's preference for governance structure or Regional cooperation with regards to scenario plan we answer that I just want to point out a clarification of materials are you it's saying here that this work program is due to dlcd by June 30th of this year for context no all right cool so that leads to my question that isn't really impact I just want to clarify it out loud so there is there is no funding for all of this work

23:54 right like there's there's no like we need you to create this thing we need your staff to do this stuff and here's this money that's going to help you pay for that stuff right maybe funding thus far has gone to elkhog and the Consultants there's no money identified obviously okay what happens if we don't get this to deadline the the June deadline I mean that's crazy ambitious I don't know about that particular deadline what the random patients like the June deadline is for submitting the plan for how we're going to address the things not for addressing all of the things um I think we can amend it I think what we probably would do is submit an incomplete plan and then staff would

24:40 come back the LCD staff would come back and tell us to fix it that's what I would guess generally if we don't comply with this division rules we face um for the rules an acknowledgment of our existing transportation system plan which could put Federal funding for projects in Jeopardy also a written um title letter on us to the States Federal Highway Administration and the ODOT the federal and state entity is saying we're not complying with their rules and they shouldn't give us funding um as well so they've written in some penalties if we don't we generally miss

25:26 the the targets for reporting to them on time Corey and then my follow-up is if I'm understanding this correctly we can say what we think should happen but this is an agreement between Eugene and Lane County so we are not the ultimate decision makers about whatever this governing body becomes well you're one of them I bet you're not the only one so what would what's the decision-making process for that like we've put forward what we think you all should do but then what event how eventually do we come to a decision and who gets to decide well I'm hoping that we all have the same answer um if we don't then we'll have to figure out how we make that decision

26:11 I'd really like or a new organization to do that I mean that isn't good that is responsibility just another thing for us to view right which is why I mean I guess my thought is we already have MPC in place let's just use it um as the structure that it is um to me that's the easy answer but I don't know how you all feel about that so okay so the I guess the questions that I have are um when you look at like NPC is definitely the way we need to go right we don't need to reinvent the wheel but under this sort of secondary hey can you consider rules of of a regional nature

26:56 and when you throw Ltd in it um is our like the way I read NPCs we would still have the everybody would still have a veto on each other right which is what sort of keeps us all together is that the way that the staff is reading the NBC bylaws is that when we consider these sort of other Regional topics outside of the MBO um that that veto Rule still is in place um I think so that I'm looking to see because I don't notice all that well um I wouldn't think they would quit evening measure we're gonna rule well I'm

27:42 looking at the MPC bylaws in terms of what um they don't like it yeah I mean I know that that's true um in a certain one configuration of MPC I think I read in there somewhere and I couldn't be mistaken but I think I read in there somewhere that the the voting requirement required that one and one member from each body correct was available to vote at least in that correct but that said or the mpo sort of traditional like Federal rules this is under some obscure hey you could do other duties as a sign and I don't think we'll have to solve it tonight but you know I MPC is the way I would prefer to do it and also I think our going

28:28 position should be make sure everybody understands that that veto Rule still applies to whatever this new scenario plans right like so actively verify that that is true when we sort of all Shake Hands here because I think it's important especially if you bringing uh LTD into the mix the other question that I have is if Cobra can opt out what's happening with Junction City they're not in the NPO and it's not looking like they will be around got it I I don't know that that decision has been finalized but based on the census numbers it's looking like Junction City will not it is still going to be out right right so I'm looking at the um bylaws Article 4 and learning names sections for

29:14 paragraph D and it says all formal actions shall require the vote of at least a simple majority of the Corn president present and the affirmative vote of at least one elected representative from Eugene sprinkled and Lane County so we we are saying that we are good yes okay I will confirm that you know with the other staff making sure it's their understanding and take forth that's a critical piece of whatever this governance structure does turn out to be if it's different than the mpo or MPC all these alphabet soups um any other thoughts on that is Victoria well I'm just curious about the LTD portion of that because it's saying

29:59 that they'll have two members it says the bylaw state that um word of Lane Transit will appoint a day on board with that I'm like did they know yes they do all right are we sort of the same they've been on it for a long time okay they do our team members borrow that's what I was curious about thank you right I think we're good on the government structure let's keep going all right thank you um so the last bit of this is about the alternative dates uh so we are putting together a proposal of alternative dates and not just for scenario planning but all of the portions of the rules for which we can

30:46 have some adjustment to the timelines uh so there's um punishment two which was in your packet last fall but now has a new column that proposed states where we've showed where we would like to encourage some of the dates out um so the Oregon Department of Transportation is providing technical assistance and funding for um Consultants to help on a lot of the components of the rules and they are don't have capacity or funding to help everybody at once

31:31 and so they have been working with the different jurisdictions to put them together in terms of this kind of spreadsheet over time and they have identified the Eugene Springfield area as starting to get funding in 2027. so given that that soon um pushing a lot of the dates out and I realized I didn't push I did get them changed in here because we had a couple meetings last week after I'd written this packet um so I got the dates changed in this but I didn't get them changed it here in the memos so a couple of those dates are actually getting pushed out to 2029 um for the performance standards and the

32:16 scenario plan um there's still a lot of work in the short term um don't think that that's giving us a lot of extra time if you look through here there's still the work on the parking and the climate friendly areas and there's a um with our housing Capacity Analysis coming up and then the housing production strategy and correlating all of that with all of this other Transportation work it's going to be a lot of work but um I just wanted to get this in front of you so you can see what we're thinking about putting together so we have to compile our dates along with new jeans and Lane counties and co-grids if they're involved and put it together in this sort of regional work program that we submit to DLC in June or before and the dates on

33:04 attachment two are updated yes well 2029 is going to be around here before we know it um in the packet you estimated that you needed three full-time staff just to work on cfac and I know that we're funding three ftes out of our funds right right when I look through the 2029 window is that estimate that we would need that we would need to carry three full-time planners just to do cpec is an ongoing interpretuity or is that but I think you know this initial push to get all of this adopted like the scenario plan we only have to do once we don't have to

33:51 keep updating that scenario plan we'll have to monitor progress report on performance measures but it's not like we'll have to keep updating the plan um our transportation plan we're going to have to keep that current our housing needs analysis those climate friendly areas those kind of things we're going to have to kind of maintain over time um so they'll still be work but hopefully not three people's worth once we get a lot of that initial work done and how much we need sort of in perpetuity thought about it and added in additional requirements coming from the state you know this this year with the housing production yeah there's more than two now the question that I like under this word plan like as we're sort of developing it when do we get to the

34:37 planning related to North Gateway they don't yeah and I think like that's the way I read it too right like in like as a community you know we added those resources specifically and this is not and not on Springfield staff but we have those resources to get other stuff this community needed done like the industrial land that we that we brought into the UTV probably 2016. and we haven't even started that word yet when we started some of the environmental work there but not on the transportation side of things other than getting that memo that you had seen but I think there's both the capacity issue but then

35:23 there's also the rules themselves as in terms of affecting North Gateway in that um we would need to update our transportation system plan to add projects serve that area and we can't do that unless we're reducing vehicle miles traveled elsewhere in the urban growth boundary and that is not obvious as to how we could do that all right like we could talk about this for a long time so Steve I'm extremely concerned about the continuous unfunded mandates that we keep getting we need to find some way to help address that somehow it just it's it's getting beautiful up our staff taking important things that we do in the city away [Music]

36:22 okay anybody else did we get you everything you needed because I think if you got us really going about cfac we could yes [Music] I did get the guidance I needed thank you very much and I will see you next time thank you Sandy is smiling this time because the last time we yelled at her so much she is not it was a Transit Rider you know we were yelling at the state but she doesn't stand there while we yelled at about the messenger thanks Sandy thanks Andy all right next item is the master fees and charges CPI with Nick

37:07 between mayor counselors my first time presenting in front of you so my name is Nick Riolo joined the city just about the what about six or seven months ago so the DPW budget manager and here to talk about Masterpiece and charges uh CPI so in recent years staff have been advised to use the Bureau of Labor Statistics uh consumer price index for the west region region size BNC uh to use the CPI that they've posted um we use the CPI because in the development world this index is familiar with Developers

37:52 and it was done to ensure that we did small increases to CPI versus large and you know keeping things flat and then doing a large increase as of February 14th 2023 CPI where this area was 6.0 it's come down a little bit but it's still fairly high as considered what is the normal range of CPA many of the fees that are listed in the master keys and charges are designed to be or cost recovery and therefore if we do not keep up then we fall further and further behind

38:44 we are recommending so if Council was decided was to not choose 6.0 percent staff would recommend a minimum of five percent CPI increase this would be to mitigate falling further behind in the cost recovery I provided a CPI summary table that shows the last three fiscal years this actually shows the Bureau of Labor Statistics western region size B and C CPI and the council approved CPI so for fiscal year 21 the index was 2.8 and we kept that flat at zero fiscal year 22 is 1.6 and we did

39:29 a 1.6 percent increase and then for fiscal year 23 8.1 was the index and we implemented a five percent increase basically here to look for guidance on what you would like to implement for fiscal year 24. all right before I open this up so um so I think I've got two questions for you know one point of how much did that translate into actual one so what's the difference between five percent and six percent in actual dollars foreign don't have that information in front of me I'm happy to get that information for

40:16 you the this is uh so far this would be our guidance so then I can spread this out and request that people increase so that I can take a look at that analysis for you so this is actually kind of the second question some of us are some of us are new some of us always just need a quick reminder that when we give you kind of a range that we're looking for what do you do with it after this is the question after you recommend a range if we say five percent today what actually what actually happens what gets increased what piece are we talking about so the master fees are a master fees uh they're a composite of all of the fees that are charged for the city uh if you were to recommend any given percentage what's going to happen is I

41:02 would take that percentage and talk to the various departments to implement what you recommended and then I would be coming back at a later time of a work session to show you the master fees and charges a redlined version which would show the old amounts as well as the new amounts and any new fees that are associated so they're going across the whole master and the old Master Fee schedule and effectively it's a little bit more complicated than that than you would add four or five percent of the cost to the fees across the board what things and you're building these planning fees this excludes we're going to increase planning fees more eventually resolved okay all right so other question Jill

41:49 so you're a staff member yes sir and so we I think we have or had or do have a consultant that's looking at these or is that looking at something else Nick is helping with that but yes we are currently working with ESU I think we're just finalizing the contract of uh IGA and Away with them and they're going to be looking not just at what we charge but how we charge the fees so you know something other big questions about methodology but like a per acre fee for some some fees versus flat fee and so they're going to be looking and comparing to a couple different agencies in our area and looking at across the board at our fees and we'll

42:35 come back to the council so that you can see that data look at the recommendation and we'll also look at Cost recovery what other what other agencies are doing for cost recovery and how those apply to how we do business today under the new code so it appears from what I'm hearing though is we're kind of get in the carpet for the horse to me before I went before I'm even comfortable making a decision to change any fee structure until we have somebody look at it third party look at it to see exactly where we sit where where the fairness scale is and I wouldn't want to see you get some input from our developer community to see where they fit in this picture because we can be themselves out to where we can we're

43:20 just nothing will cancel out so we'll just effectively throw an anchor out to all future development because we thought it was a good thing to do to raise those fees however we try to justify so I think I'm not comfortable moving forward with making any decision about any schedules until we get that that thirty thousand foot View and at least I would be more comfortable by saying yeah that I've got stuff in front of me that supports that decision but just merely staying stating what the CPI is and what these you know things floating around there that's just it's just not it's not something I can grab so I appreciate that I mean I understand what you're saying but I'm not comfortable moving forward with that my

44:06 question is how long would that study take and we don't get it in time we still might have to raise something in the meantime our goal is to have the draft report back to them by the end of um middle end of April so hopefully before the next fiscal year to have a draft like I said we're just currently side but it is a pretty quick turnaround because they do have all of the information it's just really taking our information and and comparing that so that they can they can get us that um the one thing I have a question on is I think the concern I would have is there's more we're not looking at all of the fees within the master fee schedule and so I think that's where we're we're strictly sticking with planning fees and the master fees and Charter schedule is very broad I mean it's business business

44:51 licensing fees and so right there still may be a question later about what because we can set the fee based on the information we get out of the study and maybe we are screwed up to today's economics based on the information we have so maybe it's not like we're going with a fee adjustment based on CPI but I think there are other fees that won't be affected or won't be analyzed through that study that that may still that the council may still want to look at an address on a CPI basis so so specifically what's in scope it's building these planning piece that are in scope for that study yes planning application fees and other building fees like I would be fine putting like putting the planning fees on hold until we get get an answer back on on what

45:38 that study is I think that makes sense because we're like that study is going to recommend I would assume it's going to recommend a lot of different adjustments yeah I think the council is going to have an option to look at methodologies and make some adjustments and then set the fees to what today is versus just looking at a CPI and then discussion around what cost recovery they would like to look at okay so I think for the council the the question is is everybody okay they just sort of holding on the planning component of the master fee schedule until we get a market study back well I'm going to look at it too while we're looking at it look at it broadly to see I've never been a proponent of facing our fees based on CPI because

46:23 when the CPI goes up then let's just raise our fees up and it's like what we base our CPI from where what I mean locally or is it the Portland or is it you know where's the scale starting and is that realistic for Springfield and is our CPI in Springfield adjusting or changing at the rate of different areas in the state because I I would think that there's going to be some difference I don't know if you can nail that down but I don't I just I don't like the cookie clutter approach but again I can see how difficult he would be to try to figure out okay what is the breast protein so great well and I think just to just to sort of extrapolate out this because I think we're focusing sort of narrowly on do we raise the fees or

47:08 do we don't um but one of the things that you pointed out is you know falling behind in terms of just the economics of it so I think it'd be helpful and not to create a lot of work because it could just be like here's the disaster of what happens if we don't like if we don't raise the fees or if we under whatever then where is the the funding going to come from or where the cuts going to come from in other ways or where are we going to pick that up if it's going to come from like general fund and taxpayer money that's going to offset whether or not you know we have developer fees or other things and I think that's a conversation we should know because it's not just a matter of do we or don't we is said how do we how do we balance and do that cost recovery if we're not going to do it with these for the services

47:54 okay so I think we got a couple of things going on here right like this is all did they warn you before you came and presented that this is always everybody's favorite topic to get into yeah um so I think we probably need to give give some like again I'm comfortable like let's wait on the planet on the planning components of it um if we don't choose a number as far as guidance right we still have to let the staff kind of look at you know we we could turn that into very easily and say we're not going to choose a number go back and still do the red line the red line exercise and look at what's what's it actually costing and recommend an adjustment without this some sort of guidance that would give them some sort of Direction and a chance to sort of go

48:39 okay does this even make any sense and justify it outside of the CPA CPI um that's what we did before you know before a cost adjustment but at least that would give them some sort of we're not sort of waiting to get you know get all the document documentation put together we can say Okay staff if we're not going to choose a CPI let's let's let you recommend for the adjustments on your own and then write some sort of justification about what you're doing outside of the planning piece because we're waiting on the planning piece good and and some I I hear definitely what you're saying as far as and people keep using the word cost and so that in itself is okay how do we figure cost what is it costing the city

49:28 or a person to build a house and the only thing I can figure in my head is the Staffing time it takes to push that through and to get that that stick on The Middle there may be some outliers out there but you know what I'm sure there is but really are we being upfront as to what the cost is because remember it's like your average is it 1500 square foot home on a normal 4 000 acre lot they're permitting in fees are now upward around of 28 000. somewhere in that vicinity and so I'm trying to figure out okay where where does it costing the city and versus the other entities we're

50:13 collecting credit entities but what is where does that cost how does that cost the city that much for that lot and if we know that then let's say our cost for this person this person this person and then then the developers can run around and say oh yeah oh let me bring this up what about that that technology be what have I gotten for that in the last we've been collecting for 20 years we haven't heard an update on that in seems like a couple of years and so there's they've got legit questions and we should be able to save what is it what am I getting for this was a traffic study um around 58th in Maine back behind Dutch Bros the traffic study or

51:00 analysis so when would it cost almost two hundred thousand dollars somewhere in that vicinity for that occur which killed that program it would have been a great food Hub that killed it and so who's shooting each other's flip I mean who's shooting I mean those places where any place we build our income generators for the city so are we protracting out if we if we get that thing built this year and they're paying taxes starting this year into the next 20 years but have that lot set for 10 years because of our fees how much will we have not collected and how much would the city have been been out in income until someone finally Moves In

51:45 that makes me try to collect your rent now what if you got a tenant as opposed to keeping things up so high where you can't find a tenant I'm sorry I'm just hit it but that's that's where I'm pretty clear where I stand I've always I've always said this and and it's just something that anytime you're looking at I mean right on down to our utilities of 50 a month and fees just to have water and electricity that you don't use serious is fifty dollars Victoria yeah there are things going on saying exactly what I was saying is that I just a fee for peace sake is really frustrating and you know

52:33 a developer has a lot of costs anyway and so to be able to understand or even just a mom and pop or somebody who wants to build something um we have to I need to understand what our building fees are and in comparison to our surrounding neighbors and are we you know preventing people from being able to do that because of the fee structure just for feast's sake so for me I just really need to understand what those fees are before I can say yeah let's raise those um because I'm already I already have a lot of heartburn over the planning fees so adding this in is just sort of a bull thing I just can't support that right now without more information right I'm fine with going ahead with your suggestion of letting you all I would even be fine with seeing you know what's five what's five percent look like you know in terms of raising it

53:19 um excluding the planning fee since folks have strong feels about them well like I yeah and I think the Plenty thing is it's we don't want to make the adjustment more than one time right like we just literally gave them the information like let's get all the information back so I think if people are fine with that we're waiting on the planet of these right I think answer the question that says okay from a financial perspective you know like what's one percent here right because I don't know if this is bigger than a bread box you know it's 10 grand you know like from uh across the whole city that's not that much money but if it's 10 million dollars right that's something that the group should consider and then again I'm looking and seeing that I think that or that things that are not planning related if you guys go back to the staff

54:05 and sort of say hey look at them and then you recommend some sort of changes and you know out because costs are going up from a city perspective and that's like that's a reality we got to balance the budget but if you recommend some sort of change with a justification then at least we can evaluate the red line from there is it people good with that yeah which com I mean just to find cost to me and show me show me that what's it you know where's that money going who is it being I like to use the term spent well that is it being spent well is it is it the cost of whatever project they have is it directly relative to that project or are they funding for the library or the whatever just to

54:51 build a house but we're waiting on that part because that's coming with the planning with the planning fees yeah well and I wanna so I think we're also I want to make sure that we're not mixing because I hear a lot of different v's and so some of what I hear it could be related to sdcs which we're not looking at SDC methodology or SDC rate which we would still be looking at acpi adjustment with what construction costs are today looking at planning applications okay so I'm just saying if somebody walks in and they say I want to I need a building permit on their build house or I'm going to build a garage or I'm going to do something that's you're talking about we're not talking about you say you're

55:37 not showing you're saying in this ease but then I say what are the fees and then you can't tell me what the fees are you're saying we're building and planning well I need to know what fees we're even talking about talking about land use Land Development fees so application fees like site planes when you guys come back let's clarify what's in scope with with the part we're waiting on so that everybody can like find out a recommendation you know from a snap perspective on you know so you can act we can actually see the fee you know you can say this is going up this is going down here's why um and then whatever what the overall impact is and I will flag this one again because every time we come up with this conversation can we please find 20

56:23 minutes on a work session schedule and talk about what the word program specifically related to that technology fee is that it's always a sore point right like and we like we just need to refresher about what's there what's what's coming down the pipeline and why and who decides who's deciding how to spend or Worse decision making three so to speak yes that was the criteria has been yeah every year we ask that same question so you know you can get ahead of next year by you know coming back with the technology calendar for next year's appreciate it thank you welcome welcome yeah it's good having you all right

57:09 that is it um I'm going to insure us and then we're going to magically go into into executive session in a different location an undisclosed location will be a couple of minutes so that people can clear out and she can open the uh next meeting we're at church thank you thank you