Springfield City Council — November 20, 2023

0:05 I'm going to call the city council work session to order with roll call Mayor Van Gordon here councelor Weber here councelor Mo here councelor rodley here councelor Blackwell councelor Doyle here and councelor pisher here and councelor Blackwell is excused for the evening we have two items for the work session this evening um Community Development advisory Community Committee interviews with Aaron ffield come on

1:01 up yeah you're on good both are here already any questions before I bring them in uh no I think we are ready for to bring in the first applicant great we'll start with John Aaron um and his applic is in your

1:47 packet good evening thanks for joining us John pleasure take a seat um we are got a couple of questions to ask about your application um but I don't know that you know everybody so we're going to start and let everybody introduce themselves even though we have name tags why don't you start Michelle hi Michelle Weber hi there Victoria Doyle good to meet you I'm Corey rodley she her pronouns I'm in w three nice to meet you Sean Van Gordon mayor Joe pisher w six out thirston area Steve Mo ward two all right oh great meeting you we're downwind tonight so um what strengths or

2:33 skills would you bring to the sedak committee uh I believe my background in uh building affordable homes and uh 30 years of residential construction and I run uh currently am and the project manager for Habitat for Humanity so we are dealing with the affordable housing crisis firsthand how do you think the work of sedak improves our community I think just just through the communication process you know and and um uh tapping into the uh the the community and uh having that advisory um

3:18 that that committee you know feedback for uh for the council all right and if you could make one positive change in Springfield what would it be I would go back to the housing I would just increase our affordable housing all right we only had three questions okay so thank you so much for coming in we've got one more interview and then uh we will let St have staff let let you guys know very good thank you very much thank you great to meet

4:08 I'll just add our next interview is Sher Moore and I will bring her good evening hello Sherry hi boy this cold dark night just reminds me of why I retired from city council if no one has told you guys lately thank you thank you thank you for being here and what it takes the temperature of this room's never

4:53 changed good but you've done some reorganizing it looks nice no I think you've know everybody well Michelle and I not a lot but a little yeah so um I'll just jump right into the questions what are what strengths or skills would you bring to sedak well um I have a pretty good understanding of what the committee does I actually was um city council rep I think on it for a while and so I understand that um ex dispersing Federal funds is an important part of what we do in the community and so making sure that that's done equitably and um next

5:39 thing and how do you think the work of sedak improves our community well um again dispersing those federal funds in a way that provides affordable housing to the most number of people in the most efficient way um is what it what its goal is I assume all right and if you could make one positive change in Springfield what would it be wow um you guys Springfield has become so great um I'm not sure I can think of one positive thing but I think anything that you can do again to involve the public is always a positive thing um and I've tried to be involved

6:26 um a little bit but as I said wow it's cold and dark at 5:30 oh I did want to say too um that I don't know when that application was was it like August or September I signed up for this I wasn't near as busy then as I am now so if you find that you have a more qualified candidate I'm more than happy to step aside not it was because you were having difficulties getting candidates and I thought oh my gosh and I talked to Ain and she talked me into it anyway thank you very much thank you so much coming down it's good to seeing you Sher it's nice seeing you all too keep at it good

7:26 work all right I'm going to look around and see what people are thinking about this appointment one appointment correct Ain correct there'll be one vacancy in January Sher I believe Sher made the decision for us so she sort of opted out yeah I appreciate other candidate is very very well yeah I appreciate Sher um being just you know forthcoming with that and I am supportive of John okay El rodley thank you I get to be official um I also I think it's exciting H having both of them is great um because they

8:11 both are bringing different experience and I also think that John would be a great addition and notice that um Sherry applied for both the budget and the Planning Commission so we could see her back again depending on what the need is um so I also C with John all right I think you've got your marching orders Ain um one piece of feedback that I think it's worthwhile on for sedak is we're in a big housing shortage and it's easy to see a lot of our challenges through that housing shortage and just to keep talking to people about the importance of you know cdbg money can be Economic Development money as well right so we always want to see a variety of projects anytime we can it's not just 100% housing money thanks

8:58 thank you Arin all right next item looks like it's Dan Hurley with Lane County with the integrated material and energy recovery and Dan yes let's push do just just once and it'll stay on okay great all right um I

9:43 know you've got a couple of slides you want us to save our questions until the end so you can get through the slides that would be preferred yes thank you mayor okay yeah all right well good evening mayor and counselors thank you for your time this evening uh we're really excited to talk to you about uh a big project of the county called the IMF it's the integrated materials and energy recovery facility I know that's a mouthful um I'm Dan Hurley I'm the Public Works director at Lane County and I'm joined by Jeff orlandini want introduce yourself Jeff it's I'm Jeff orlandini I'm the manager for the waste management division Lane County Public Works all right so we've got some slides to go through for the project um this is a project that's been in the works for several years the timeline is in your packet of how we how we got here I it's

10:29 an exciting project um because it's multiple projects in one it's a it's a climate project it's uh an economic development project it's an infrastructure project because it will extend the life of the landfill and add infrastructure um to our waste um management uh system here and I'll take you through the objectives of the project and key features um and local economic impact Jeff will kind of get into more of the details around what the system is and then we can talk about um the impact to rates and then we can even talk about uh the Glenwood transfer station if you'd like to talk about that because I know it's a higher priority for the council um so getting into the slides here um so the objectives for the project this started as a way to try to

11:16 get us to meet our our goal for Recovery um recovery of waste we we call it our recovery rate um it's something that we have to report to through the state and and DEQ um compiles the numbers we've been at around a 50% recovery rate for quite a few years we were at a 53 we're actually just under that right now and it's not so much the number but it's about trying to keep materials out of the landfill to to conserve landfill space to mitigate the impacts of the landfill what people a lot people don't know is is the landfill has a significant uh impact on the environment um we do everything we can there to make sure it doesn't um impact groundwater and things like that but when waste decays in the land fill it produces methane and methane is a harmful

12:01 greenhouse gas and so the landfill is actually the second largest stationary source of methane emissions in the county and so we're trying to um we're trying to improve our impact there or lessen our impact there this is a big jobs pro project we'll get into some more slides that talk about the number of jobs but but this means jobs for Springfield residents that that work at Springfield companies and you know some people have said that the timing is isn't great for this project because of economic factors some could say that this the timing is perfect for an influx of a large project like this that brings a lot of federal money into our area to create jobs we've tried really hard to keep this at uh a low impact to the rate payer and I'll get into to the rates

12:47 when we get to the end of the pro the presentation here um another objective is to use proven processing systems we don't want to work use something that's brand new um and um and and potentially fail we we are looking at systems that are tried and true we've gone to California to look at some of these systems uh We've T toured bulk handling um systems facilities and I'll mention that right now so this is a this is a public private private partnership um we're trying to do this in a way that uh brings private investment into this and the way we have this structured is um a private firm bulk Handling Systems is our partner on this we went through an RFP process and selected bulk handling they are local firm here a manufacturer in in Eugene that produces processing

13:33 facilities um processing equipment all over the world um so we went down to California and looked at several of the facilities that are operating down there and it's pretty amazing um the the technology that has brought into this um to achieve these objectives so some of the key features it would be a state-of-the-art facility using very advanced technology even um AI robotics that be are able to pull uh waste off of quickly moving conveyor belts um and it's exciting to be able to move to a high-tech sort of facility because some of these um material recovery facilities that are operating elsewhere in the state are pretty Dirty Jobs where people are pulling stuff off the line and and pretty um challenging conditions this would also be sort of

14:19 three facilities in one there's we would be able to sort the garbage that comes in from residential garbage trucks and pull out the recyclables that shouldn't be in there the Organics waste um food waste things like that that can be um produced um go into an anerobic digestor um that's my third bullet there to talk about um the food waste can be instead of in the in the landfill decomposing can decompose in what's called an anerobic digestor and produce methane in in a higher capture way so that we're not emitting so much methane um and that can go into uh fuels for transportation um and then the second bullet there was about this the other part of the facility that would be able to sort sort

15:04 blue bin co-mingled recycling so instead of trucking our recycling clear up to the Portland area to be sorted we'd be able to sort that here and be able to supply those commodity Bales locally or be able to Market them from here uh the fourth bullet there is about um the the outputs out of the anerobic digestor there would be the leftover um processed waste which we'll be able to use at the Landfield cover cover material um landfills use a lot of soil and we have to import that soil onto our site so this would be a big cost-saving for the landfill over time and then the last piece there is we'll have an educational facility really exciting to be able to teach the Next Generation about you know the best ways of processing waste and handling our our our garbage um so we would have tour

15:49 groups coming through there um through probably through a a contract with BRING Recycling um to to teach the Next Generation Um again this is a big Economic Development um project 135 million construction value and we're looking at teaming with local firms so um Chambers construction has been integral in this project they completed a 30% design so that we could refine the cost for this project um bulk Handling Systems uh partners with Far West steel for all the production of their their materials that's a uh a company located here in Springfield and bulk Handling Systems again a Eugene company the economic revenue from the plant estimated at $38 million lots of direct jobs um during

16:35 the construction over 190 jobs and then 65 jobs ongoing to maintain the facility and then we had an uh economic analysis done by a third party I think that needs to be updated there on the next slide we'll get into that um over a $272 million impact I think is what the number is when we get to the next slide and and it's an employment piece you know for the people that will be operating this facility we're looking at at a minimum of a 25-year operation and and would hope to extend that um well into the future um the landfill currently has a landfill life of about 70 years we can extend that with the use of this facility by at least 20 years and so this you can't read it's too small but yeah $272 million economic impact um estimated by a third party um

17:22 onward Eugene and I'll pass now to Jeff so one of the big benefits obviously for us is besides the diversion is the greenhouse gas reductions and being able to capture those like Dan said on the front end of our process we call it so instead of waste um you know slowly creating that methane gas and being captured over over years with a large fugitive emission rate being able to capture that on the front end pull it out of those Organics before anything enters the landfill um and so we estimate the the decrease in those CO2 emissions to be somewhere around the equivalent of taking 6% of the cars off the roads in Lane County um just because I know for me sometimes that's easier to wrap my head around than a big 88,000 number um and so

18:09 really excited about being able to reduce those greenhouse gas emissions and then also to capture that put it on the natural gas pipeline and possibly in the future partner with someone like LTD to to maybe fuel buses with with that um so that's when we get into the RNG production um again you know just showing the the benefit of being able to capture that gas and and capture it in a much faster and and more efficient way um Dan talked a bit about the recyclables as well so as folks know we have the recycling monitorization act that's coming online in 2025 um the bulk Handling Systems believes that having a recycling facility processing facility here in Lane County can take advantage of a lot

18:55 of the changes coming online with that recycling modernization act and being able to Market materials here from Lane County as opposed to sending them somewhere else to to be marketed by a third party and um that will allow us to have you know increase the types of recyclables we can take um both through this facility inherently and then also with the changes coming from the recycling monitorization act being able to accept a lot of those materials that we used to be able to put in our our bins and and can longer do that um really excited as a former educator about the education center and being able to have that onsite with viewing platforms to look at the the operation um you know it's going to be located in Goan which is great because

19:40 it's a a great place to have student groups and other group stop see the facility learn about how we manage waste in the county and then um go see the landfill as well and so really excited about being able to have that it' be up on a second floor and look directly down on on all three of those um lines in the facility um you want to talk about the partnership sure so the way this would be set up there we go uh the way this would be configured with the arrangement is that the county would purchase the property we're looking at a property um in Goan about an a mile before you get to the landfill um there between Highway 99 and um Interstate 5 we would on the the building do the site preparation and

20:25 con well we would do the site prepar and construct the building at a cost of about 35 million um bulk Handling Systems would then Supply the equipment that goes into into the building and and also run the operation to do the Sorting um and anerobic digestion running the facility um so that's the the structure there we're still working out the final details on the contract which will relate to the costs um this will help us meet our Solid Waste goals our climate action plan goals and uh on the timeline we're looking at about a 24mon construction we're we'll be going to the board for an update on November 27th and for a decision on December 12th and we're trying to move

21:10 this timeline quickly because we need to start construction by the end of next calendar year to be able to capitalize on very significant um Federal incentives um that aren't going to be around if we if we delay on this project and so here's a a schematic of uh where the facility would um overlay onto an aerial photograph of Eng Goan so the the first building there is um warehouser if you're familiar with the facility so it would be kind of tucked in behind that as you're heading to the landfill uh here's another um picture of it from Interstate 5 so as people are coming into our community they'll be able to see this Flagship facility um very excited um for uh some development

21:58 to happen in Goan the board of commanding Commissioners has been trying to do some economic development in Goan for quite some time uh here's a a schematic of the internal workings of the facility and I have a couple zoomed in views uh it would be full of sorting facil sorting equipment that uses really high-end um technology to to pull out the recyclables in different ways um so one half of it would be um of the Sorting equipment part of that's for the commingle Sorting line and part of it's for the garbage sorting line and then the anob digestor um would be on the other side of the facility so that's a a quick overview of the facility um we threw out some big numbers there and costs of the the projects so you're probably wondering

22:43 what's what's this going to cost and what's what's it mean to me and what's it mean to your constituents so we've we're still working on the numbers I think we're going to be able to actually get our estimates down from what we talked with the board about a month ago when we were with the board we laid out kind of the worst case scenario um if we don't get any sort of um additional funding into the project from some Grant um opportunities that we're going to be applying for which we think we have a pretty good shot at um and and sort of R really rough estimates on the revenues that we'll receive through this partnership with bulcan link systems um to be able to offset costs so when we talked to the board we talked about um a six-year financing plan that would be uh over the the CPI so we're talking about

23:30 kind of a baseline CPI that we have to do every year anyway of about 3% and we would be doing that regardless and and we have to do that to pay for the infrastructure um at the landfill so our last landfill sell cost $20 million so um those types of things with this project we'll be able to delay those those projects so they won't come as quickly and that helps with the revenue side of those project but we looked at a six-year um price increase of an 8% in in Year One one um in 8% in year two three and four and then a 5% and a 2% um and that sounds like a lot and it is however um people should realize that those increases are only part so that's what people would pay that's what trucks

24:15 would pay at the landfill or at this facilities rather um when people um look at their garbage bill they don't know that only about 20% of that bill is the for the landfill disposal cost the rest is made up of personnel costs and Trucking and and Fuel and things like that so you take those numbers and take 20% of those and that's the impact um to people's rates and so it's about 20% for a residential customer it's about 30% for a a commercial customer and so the way that works out is people are looking at about a 2% increase on their rates for those 11% years which equates for up to about a 50 to 60 Cent increase on people's garbage bills so we think that that's you know pretty

25:00 minimal that people probably won't notice that so much and feel that and the the the the other benefits kind of outweigh those those smaller incremental costs of of the jobs in the community the extend the extending this resource for a whole generation you know a 20 to 25 year increase to the life of the landfill that we may not see in our our current um lifespan but um that'll it'll mean something to Future generations to be able to have this infrastructure of value for the county so I think that covers the rates piece of it um for the commercial customers they're looking at about a 3% uh increase for those each of those years on average um over a six-year time span so I think that's it um the only other piece would be to talk about um the

25:46 Glenwood transfer station um these are separate projects you know there would be need to be separate funding to move the transfer station we've gotten to this point with this project because it's been a multi-year vetting process where we committed to a goal and then we went through a a series of vetting criteria to do a design to get cost estimates um those various things you know I would suggest if we want to get on a path for relocating the transfer station um we would need to go through a similar vetting process and I would be willing to to commit to trying to do that with you um but I think it needs to be conversations with um the board of County Commissioners and and to align with the city's goals so I'll leave it there and and and and take your questions thank you for your time well thanks Dan um we're going to start with

26:34 Corey thank you thank you very much for this and I I just have a couple of questions to start with because I'm sure other folks have questions as well I know initially there was a request of the state legislature to invest in this project and I think that they didn't but do you anticipate any future funding possibly coming from the state either to the county or maybe perhap perhaps to the company that's doing it to help offset some do you have any anticipation of that thank you counselor yes we we anticipate that if we get a yes vote from the the County Commissioners on December 5th that the state will come in with some noin bonding for the for the project to the amount of $34 million so that's huge for

27:21 this project and and we're still hopeful on that um we've had a lot of conversations with different politicians at the state level and and there's General support for it um the problem has been that housing has been such a big issue that that's where the bulk of funding has gone um in the last legislative session um we do hope to bring an Ask back we we asked for $15 million in the last session and didn't get anything but I think we need to pitch it more as an economic development project and and have the state understand the importance of that so we do anticipate going back to ask for money from the state great thank you and I have one more piece to my question question um one of the um lenses that I bring is um as I'm always looking at like what what are things going to look like 10 or 20 or 30 years down the line

28:08 and so I'm curious if you have given any thought to what happens if we do not do this now like will it increase expenses will we have you have I'm just curious as to if that's been part of your sort of risk planning is to think about if we don't do this then what thank you counselor if we don't do this then we kind of continue businesses as as usual we would continue to work with epud um they're our partner out at the landfill they currently capture gas from the landfill and just inherent with that system it's not terribly efficient um it's been running at about a 50 to 60% efficiency rate so um they've done some improvements that may be getting that up but we haven't seen um current numbers but still that's a lot of um emissions coming from the landf so that will continue um they're kind of invisible

28:54 silent emissions but that's happening so that would continue um we would continue to fill up our landfill kind of at the current rates and and the and investment but really it's um looking down the line and not knowing what the future holds for for a new landfill so you know that's quite a ways down the line but other communities are starting to face that now so Douglas County coffin bu up by Maran County um they're looking at less than 15 years left in their landfill I'm glad we're not in that situation we we have this resource that's unique and that it's owned by the county we we have some of the lowest garbage rates um in the state um because we don't operate at a profit so even with these increases you know we're we're not getting anywhere near the the

29:39 higher end of what people appearing like in the Portland area so um I think it's just looking down further down the line of of not having a landfill when that you know comes comes full um but that that is a long way down the line uh Joe and then we'll go to Victoria thank you evening Dan I got a couple couple questions and and I'm going to challenge you the whole way because I have a hard time swallowing these types of numbers and and have a hard time swallowing it only only boil down to a 56 or 50 cents to 60 cents Financial impact to rate payers per month yeah so I'm looking at

30:24 those numbers and but I'm also wondering on this greenhouse gas emissions are those is that a self-imposed mandate as far as that's what that's what Lane County leaders want to do is reduce the gas emissions or is that a state requirement currently counselor great questions um so the the first piece is with those those big numbers how it kind of gets to small numbers you know we're talking about what the percentages of of that tipping fee we talked about and then that down to a monthly increase and then we're talking about a period of over six years so um but and then how that gets to to big money is that there you know there's a lot of customers and a lot of tonage coming in the landfill so those stack those those are stacking those are stacking so when we're talking

31:10 you know four years from now we're talking about you know about 250 a month 250 a month yeah but then what I I tell people is you know Netflix increased $44.50 a month over the last four years people didn't even notice it you know Netflix is yeah yeah so yeah but I'm just going to give you a bunch of them you can think about them all and so we're talking about Tien fees in that that is a commercial cost and so the commercial folks that Supply those that service are going to pass that on to rate payers so that's that's part of that 50 and 60% increase you're anticipating right I mean correct correct yes so as miles so and and correct me if I'm wrong

31:55 but there's been uh I don't know if you want to call it rumor or estimations or talk of requiring Regional waste haulers and not allow them to T tip anywhere else but here councelor we are we are not talking about flow control at this point so flow control is requiring waste to come to to the facility we think that we can operate this in in a economical matter where it's it's beneficial to the hollers to come here um the you know when you talked about 80% of the the cost being Trucking Personnel all that you know that would be very expensive to drive to the nearest landfill up to coffin but um we we think there will actually be some savings to the haulers here because it'll be closer than to the landfill they won't have to drive up

32:41 onto the everchanging gravel roads up on the landfill to save time um time is money for them we'll also have a place where they can bring the co-mingle recycling and not have to truck that clear up to Portland so we're hoping that those offset actually the the increases to tipping bees and that it will just make economic sense for the haulers to continue that's kind of an unknown for right now we also don't know that we even have the legal authority to require flow control in the cities so our County Council is looking at that but we're we're hoping that we can operate this in a way that doesn't doesn't need that the people you know would want to the haulers would want to use this facility so they're looking at a 44% increase over the last over the next four years after if it starts 44% tipping fee increase which is a pretty

33:26 hefty increase in business cost and so again they're going to go right to us and say we got a bump our up 11% a year to make up that difference yeah on on their 20% of their cost so you know take 20% of that 44% so um and and but again I'm just trying to you know paint this as uh an infrastructure cost you know when we talk about the wastewater treatment facility you know they have to do large in we had a 19% increase you know a few years ago um and some pretty significant ones that were in this range to build you large Capital investments in the waste treatment plant there there are just you know significant in Investments that need to happen for the long-term infrastructure but I didn't get to your

34:12 second question and I forget what it was it was it was actually the emiss part the emissions the that and then and then you were speaking of uh the gas recovery methane gas recovery and putting it into the fuel system basically an RNG facility and have you priced out what an RNG facility would cost about so uh councel the first question about what's driving this um on the emissions goals that is a at the county level um that was part of our climate action plan and trying to address you know our um our big impact um opportunities um so however I'm anticip ipating the way things are going

34:58 with regul regulating landfills and there was a governor executive order that we're we we're going to have to follow the most stringent standards of our neighboring um States you know California is getting very stringent um the EPA is really clamping down on on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from landfills and potentially you know looking at Food waste prohibitions so um I think this would help us get ahead of what I see coming as as um as Federal drivers for um these emissions reductions because you know we built one locally here at mwmc and the cost for that facility was $14 million so and then then to your piece about the RNG facility that is priced into this

35:43 that's that's kind of those three facilities here in one um the Anor robic digestor is that piece of it and bulk Handling Systems um has several of these facilities operating and knows the pricing on them and so that's part of this arrangement and they have they're working on an agreement with Northwest Natural to to purchase that gas and then potentially off have that available for offes for um transportation fuels as long as you got a buyer yes because it's it's way all over the place right now yeah okay thank you Victoria thank you thanks for coming I actually heard some of this in your uh Lane County um meeting with last month or something when you presented it uh has there been much public input on

36:28 this there hasn't been a lot of public input we we've talked about this at several times with the board and there's always the opportunity for public um in public comment um we have been engaging our Solid Waste stakeholders as a group of haulers and and city um officials that that come to those roughly quarterly and so we've been keeping them up to date over the last several years as we've um worked towards this project um but we haven't had like a open public meeting on on this um but we've talked with the the City Club of Springfield um this session here so we're trying to get the word out to the public um the crestwell chronicle did a article uh today about the project so I think the word starting to get out there there's the Register Guard is working on a on a

37:13 piece right now so um I think that'll be out there in the community and then then the community has the opportunity to talk to our commissioners in public comment over the next um two sessions while we're talking about these so have you entered into NE negotiations for that property and Goan we have a public um sale agreement where contingent on the board's approval we do have um a purchase option in place so it kind of sounds like and forgive me if I comes across wrong but it kind of feels like you've already kind of made up your mind and that it really doesn't matter what the public says at this point that you're you're moving forward with this whether we agree or whether the public agrees or anyone agrees is that correct councelor it's a decision for the the County Commissioners to make and so

37:58 we're lining it up with um options for purchasing the property entering into the contract um and potentially raising fees and and so the the Commissioners will be the did I say counselor the the Commissioners um the Commissioners will be the deciders on this it just seems like a a very large amount of money that you're looking at spending for this um 10% maybe 17 if B&G gets what they want but the for that increase in a self-imposed um recovery rate that you're looking for it just seems like a lot and so um and it's not really insignificant I mean you keep saying it like it's no big deal but it is a big deal I mean you're raising rates and you're doing you know consecutively over a period of time like putting a frog in a pot of water and

38:43 then slowly turning up the heat right they don't realize it um but there's other costs that are going to be in involved I mean what about when we do the luche pipeline like how much is that going to end up increasing rates and then what if we do decide to move the Glenwood State now there's another increase that's going on so I mean this isn't just one little amount that it it just feels like you're sort of minimizing the impact um and I and I just have some concerns with that not that I don't know that it matters but it it just seems like it's like this is what you want to do and it doesn't really matter because it's that end goal and that kind of is a bummer to hear okay uh Castor and I don't don't mean to minimize it I'm just trying to lay out the full project I'm I'm more sort of as a public works director focused on the infrastructure side of it and 20 years

39:29 of a landfill life is huge I we should calculate the millions of dollars you know of that um and when we get to the end of our landfill life the cost of exporting our waste out of county is going to be exorbitant um there a new landfill hasn't been permitted in Western Oregon in I think 50 years and I don't know that another one will given our our our wet conditions here so I'm you know very focused on preser reserving this asset for future generations of of lighton County Citizens so has there been any Outreach to our local stakeholders in ways that they could do this work without spending 135 million like Santa Pac and EOS sore like International Paper um you know I mean

40:15 have you has there been conversations about how you could do this reduction of the greenhouse and stuff without building yes councelor we we did a a request for proposals process where we solicited for other options we received two other options one was from EOS sort um and one was another firm that had an interesting kind of garbage press squeeze process that would send the the the Wastewater liquid to the wastewater treatment facility neither of those proposals got to our goals for both the um recovery rate piece and the uh emissions piece the EOS sort proposal FOC Focus primarily on construction demolition debris um which it doesn't

41:00 produce a lot of methane gas so we would still be interested in and looking at that proposal in particular to try to increase our construction demolition recycling um but but the bul caning systems proposal was the one that Rose to the top in that process okay just looking through my Michelle thank you Dan for the presentation and Jeff um just a couple of questions one to tack on to um councelor Doyle's regarding public input um I think I heard you at the last commissioner's meeting say in reference

41:45 to Glennwood that you would um if if you were to take that project to look at it you know for future um that you want to make sure that that's the right project for the community and that you would be looking for um input at that point what does that input look like as opposed to the input you're getting right now for this other project thank you counselor we were we were thinking about doing a survey um to gauge how how far people would drive and and you know what kind of impact that would be for them you know as I'm thinking about it we've been thinking about a lot over the last month you know since since that presentation I think what the Glenwood project needs is a similar sort of vetting process where we look at not only a survey but going

42:33 through looking at potential properties seeing if we can get um purchase sale agreements for those you know looking at what would be best whether it be you know moving the land or the transportation to Goan would it be you know an East Springfield and a West Eugene maybe du two so people aren't having to drive so far if we do um relocate and then going through some some design processes so we can get a realistic ballpark of what it would cost to relocate the transfer station I don't think we have a really really firm number on that so it would be going through those similar processes um as far as public engagement um we were just thinking primarily that survey piece of it um we haven't done a survey around uh this project and perhaps we should have

43:18 um that just wasn't considered okay and then one other question at that meeting also you were asked to prioritize between Lee Glennwood and URF and you had a response to that and I just thought maybe you could share that here too sure so the imrf project we're prioritizing because of the federal funds that are available for this project that are only available if we start by the end of next calendar year and so we're talking um for the energy U production piece of it there's a 40% tax credit on all that so we're talking you know millions of dollars that we have this unique time in history with all this Federal um stimulus money that's happening um I don't know that this project could pencil if we wait you know another year on this um so that's why

44:04 it's such a high priority and also because it's been a high priority for the board it's been in our strategic plan it's been you know part of our climate action plan there there are number drivers for this and and really the sooner the better you know there's a the proverb you know when's the best time to plant a tree well it would have been 20 years ago the next best time is now um so if we can get started on the in waste the longer it makes this asset asset waste asset last for us um so the second priority project um was the um the pipeline and that one also could take advantage of some federal stimulus money that's also it's a different pot of money and it's also a project that's been a high priority for the board um

44:50 the the Gard the board um had it was called the great plan for it was uh economic stimulus plan around um development of Goan and so Goan is hindered by not having a Wastewater system and so we would love to be able to move that project forward um different pot of money um that wouldn't wouldn't affect this um to the degree of you know other potential projects um and then the third one was uh relocating the Glenwood transportation and it's just we're not very far along with that it's it hasn't been made a high priority of the board so I think it's a conversation that that we need to have you know jointly between the commission and and the um your your city council here and and Elevate that as a priority so that

45:35 that was why the ranking thank you Steve me thank you you mentioned tax credit how does that work tax credit um it's called Uh the production tax credit typically that's available for um private entities to um to to sell off a piece of their tax liability and I'm not a private business owner and I'm not sure how all that works um to great detail we do have Steve Miller here in the audience who is the um CEO of bulk Handling Systems who could probably answer that better if you would like to call him up um but with this Federal stimulus stimulus money that's available right now that's also extended into um public entities and I don't think I can

46:21 speak well enough of how that works for the configuration of the tax credit but I'd be happy to to look into that more and get you some information pretty simple huh thank you um okay U the meth the methane situation I remember that coming up years ago and epot stepping up and going in there to capture that and that's been very successful I'm I'm sure it's outdated by now and of course there's lots more to catch but uh anyway we've been working ahead on on it has been a great project and then um I don't trust I don't trust those anticipated uh rate Rises being contained that small and you had you didn't talk about commercial rates out there you talked about residential rates and I heard two

47:06 I heard 3% per year and then I I heard a 20% I don't know what the heck that meant and as far as commercialist are concerned and and of course it's going to be the rate payers and I think I think the public should know more about this you I like it but it should need we need to do it they need to know so councelor um so I addressed that briefly but we covered a lot of material so um sorry if I wasn't clear enough on that so we we talked about for the residential customer that the increases that we're talking about Equate to 20% of that overall cost for the commercial we talked about that that's more closer to the 30% range so Santa pack 30% over

47:51 what period 30% um of their of a of a garbage rate so if a commercial company is paying their their garbage bill 30 about 30% of that is the landfill disposal rate and then looking at the the cost per year so Santa pack gave us some numbers and for the average Commercial Business it was about a 3% increase over each year over a six-year period and but then there were some some anomalies there were some you know hospitals you know large you know large you know schools and you know the those look a lot larger um but again there are

48:36 much larger businesses too and you know the as far as you impact to schools or you know nonprofits we don't get into setting garbage rates that's between your huler and the city so you know if discounts were wanted if you wanted to see discounts applied to you know specific entities like nonprofits that would have to be an arrang with your huler the the commercial residential people they don't care about that they they want to know how much it's going to cost them each month and you're not really telling us that so I guess the challenge counselor is that it it really varies you know small business to uh the hospital of how much tonnage they produce so you know I can't tell you what the the dollar amount is per month all I can give you is about a percentage and so for for a kind of an average siiz

49:24 business it was about a 3% um impact each of those years on their garbage bill whatever that amount is and I don't we might have that actually that sounds pretty small so common Commercial Services of 125 pounds per yard increase per year was a $481 increase for like a sandwich shop for a restaurant would be um 1,316 so those those look like you know bigger numbers but they're also you know bigger businesses so yeah

50:13 oh anyway I don't I don't trust those numbers two one other thing there's $180 million project in a year and a half or two years things don't move that fast around here that's doing pretty pretty good job I mean the city trying to get the city to move on some stuff and it just takes some years to get something going and you yeah but councelor we we've been working on this project yeah for the last three years pretty solid um so you know it's getting everything lined up and then it's Off to the Races to to to do the construction piece of it but those numbers that I just quoted came from Santa Pac from your huler okay um that's good one last question is coff and beute are are there some materials we cannot okay I understand there's some materials we can't dump here we have to take it to cofb is that

50:59 true that is not true actually counselor they they operate under the same rules that we do um that are regulated by the state um I will say they're a private business um and you know really it's about getting as much quantity in and profit um and so some materials we don't really want because we think it'll be a longtime liability long-term liability and they happily take because they're less what is the word and then I hear they're going going to be shutting down to be being restricted also they are in a real bind right now counselor if you've seen the news um they only have about two years left in their current landfill cell they have another landfill cell that they're wanting to expand into but um it's part

51:47 of it was they were planning to Quarry out a bunch of rock there like two million yards of rock that they're trying to excavate out quickly so they're going to have to kind of Limp limp along in that cell they were hoping for another expansion that would get them over 40 years and um that's probably not going to happen from what I've heard in the community up there okay so any I've heard that there just some things we couldn't they they couldn't dump here and they had to take out the coffin but coffin butes get restricted then if they go out of business where where's it going to go and that's just a question that's for the future yeah they're probably looking at exporting to Eastern Oregon Eastern Washington Long Way that's all your garbage a long ways right and that's what again what I'm trying to prevent for us in the future even though it's

52:32 not my generation but future H anyway I'm really concerned about those rate rate numbers out there for the for the user I mean you give me all these numbers per here but I want to know what the what the restaurant's going to pay really and and the businesses and the homes different kinds of business they're the ones they're going to have to bear the bun of it running this I I wanted to make sure that it's fair to them thank you thank you coun all right I've got a couple of questions um so one of the things that we keep coming coming back to is this question about rates um and I know you guys were working with Santa Pac for to kind of agree upon numbers so are the is the rates that in the copy of the letter

53:17 that um Santa Pac provided are those rates that the County agrees with yes um yes mayor we are although I will say that we've been having a lot of contract negotiations even up to today where we think we may be able to to raise that or sorry lower that so we were looking at like an 8% in the first year we may be able to get that as low as 6.5 but we're still in the final negotiations on numbers and there are different factors in play right but for from a commercial accounts I'm seeing things like the you know hospitals paying $5,200 more in in an increase in a month um you know large apartment complexes 12289 a month um you know there's one that's 411 a month right which it just like I'm just trying to

54:03 wrap my head head around the the difference and impact for for rates because they really do vary widely between the type of user we're talking about yes mayor but that what that doesn't show is what what is their current total bill you know I'm more interested in sort of the percentages because because there's so much variation between a large apartment complex Hospital versus you know a small sandwich shop sure and I think I think one of the I guess challenges here with when we're talking specifically about rates and I think overall the the project is probably running F too fast through this part of the conversation is that when when I hear different parts in the community right people are not agreeing upon a set of facts right like so you still have questions right like and you know in the mind I keep coming back to

54:49 is are we all are we all agreeing upon what these rates actually mean because that will make it easier for people to explain to folks in the community about whether or not we choose to do this and it still sounds like there's a little bit of a disconnect I don't I don't know that there is Mayor we agree with the santaa numbers but but what had been provided didn't show the full picture it doesn't show what their total okay the total rate is for example but we agree with the percentages okay um the other the other comment I want to make about rates and I and then we can then we can jump to a couple areas that I've got questions about is I just and I realized this is probably an issue for the County Commission more than it is for you guys as County staff right but based on what our franchise agreement is We Are The

55:34 Entity that is going to actually impose these you know rate increases on the users and I re like I have a real issue with how fast this conversation going without us getting a chance to really truly weigh in because we are the people that are going to actually vote the rate increases in and you know if the project sort of jumps off you know we're going to we're going to be sort of be stuck right and this is not the only rate increase that we asked every single year for Santa Pac is going to have you know obviously an increase to their cost that go along with that right so we're not really seeing the holistic picture and again that's an issue I got with the you know with the County Commission more than I do with with you guys from from a staff perspective understand um the the next I guess question that I have is really

56:19 around this issue about flow control and I really like I keep listening for the clarity and the conversations I've been following this for about the last month when are you saying that we're not never never going to have flow control that that's off the table May I'm not saying that I'm saying that one I'm hoping that we don't have to have that conversation because I don't really want to set up a fight that we don't need um the second piece is that as far as my reading of um Oregon statute is that we could only apply Supply flow control outside of the city limits but we're waiting for a County Council opinion on that um but that's what's is my reading that's what if you

57:06 just look at the plain language of it it talks about our Authority being outside of the Cities so um I don't know if the board would ever consider that outside of the Cities but we're not proposing that at this time under what conditions would you be recommending to the board that they pursue a conversation about flow control with the cities mayor I think we would want to engage in that if we're seeing risk for this facility um to be able to operate um that's not at a financial detriment to the county so if we build the this facility and we need to guarantee a certain amount of tonnage coming into the facility um for our agreement with bulk Handling Systems and we're not able to meet that because large parts of the county are exporting out to another

57:52 landfill then I think we would need to engage in that and not only because of the financial viability of this project but also because our landfill rates support an entire system so the free hous household hazardous waste program you know that's covered by our landfill rates the community cleanup that that Springfield does that we give a fee waiver for those that's covered by our landfill R so there's whole system of 15 transfer stations that's supported by our L rates so if if we're not able to sustain ourselves financially because waste is going out of the community and not paying into the system then I think

58:38 we would need to look at a flow Control Ordinance and and I would want to do that in partnership with the cities and and hope that they would um you want to sustain the system that we have you want to jump in with the question here just back to the rate flow or rate flow or not rate flow the FL control flow control so I'm if I'm hearing you correctly is that you don't want to approach that but you you're not willing to say that's off the table so that is embedding a risk and so you're asking for folks to make decisions based on a potential risk down the road and we don't know if that's going to or occur

59:25 or not occur that that's as an elected person it's kind of spooky to say okay I'm gonna make a decision but I'm not sure how it's going to happen what's going to happen to the folks down the road because once we pull a trigger on this it's not the once rounds down the chamber it's not going anywhere but straight out the barrel that's that's fearsome for me yes councelor I understand and it it gives me concern as well um there is is risk there we're trying to mitigate that again by keep keeping these costs low to to the haulers and and providing these benefits to the haulers of having local options for processing and and and bringing their waste that I think will offset their operational cost so um I'm seeing it as not as big a risk

1:00:11 because I don't think it's going to make Financial sense for haulers to take their waste out of the county and really not wanting to set up a big argument about that in the community at this point in time um one I don't think we have the time to work through that um and also it may not be needed Victoria thank you first off I appreciate the fact that you're very passionate about this it's obvious that you you you feel very passionate about it you I just want to get back to you were talking about the Santa Pac uh rates and you were saying that you don't have the current rates and it looks to me like they are there and maybe I'm reading this wrong but if you look at page three it says total waste Bill per month and then it says new waste bill so they're showing you the rates that are current and then what the new rate is

1:00:56 going to be okay all right so I think that's important since that was part of your what you were saying there right I guess it wasn't the total amount I mean I was we we also don't have the total tonnage there I was just wanting the whole picture but we do have the we have the increase per month we have the increase per year total waste bill um some new waste Bill those are those are the pieces we have yeah it's just it was confusing because in the you were saying 11% for four month for four years and then then it goes to eight then it goes to five and then when you were talking you said 8% and 88 eight and then goes to five so it's just it's still an increas um and just part of it in trying to summarize off of this is that there are you know there's 20 different rows

1:01:43 on this with each has a different percent increase ranging from you know 33% to 10% so you know trying to summarize that down into you know something um more simple for the conversation is challenging yeah and it's easier to pick the one that's only $2 um so uh if it was up to me the Le pipeline would be by far in a way the priority I I think that the risk that we take with that stuff being hauled and the fact that that's necessary and now you're saying that there's actually a pot of money that might be separate that could actually help with that I would be pretty much all in if that's what you were talking about here and councelor I I just wanted to say that we're not putting this as the kind of the second project and waiting to to act on that

1:02:28 we're actively moving on that project it's just held up right now by some land use issues that we're working through okay this is a really great discussion this has really helped us I think a lot get our get our mind around this um one of the questions I also hear is you know we do have a com Engle site that is you know in one of the Mills and um and they had some serious questions about you know the cost and the impact is that been addressed with IP mayor is not we it has not we have not engaged um in conversations my understanding is that IP doesn't do significant processing of that comingo waste you know that basically they they pull out the cardboard that they would want and we with this facility would

1:03:13 imagine we would be entering into an agreement with IP to take the cardboard um but that the rest of the material goes um to for further processing so um this this facility would be different in that we would be able to have you know fully bail bales of HTP plastic you know and you know different Commodities and I realize you guys are still under um risk you know under active negotiations right but I'm you know when we when we we're talking about the flow control question who's act like who's carrying the Financial Risk here is it's shared between in the public private partnership is the county hearing it all um I hear that you know and some of the conversation so yes we're still actively negotiating

1:03:58 there a lot of different pieces on this um as far as risk goes the county has some risk in that we need to guarantee a certain amount of tonnage coming to the facility to be processed the county will pay to have that processed um our benefit will be the the landfill air airspace that over time um and um and sorry another piece of that is um with the equation is uh host fee so we're we're giving space for the commingle Sorting um line so bulk handing systems will pay us a host fee for that um we'll also have a potential Revenue share for um revenues above and a Beyond a certain

1:04:44 threshold for the sale of the recyclable Commodities um also for the renewable natural gas so there are a lot of different components on this the as but I would say risk goes there's also risk for bulk Handling Systems to be able to perform there's a you know certain amount of um diversion they have to achieve um in in sorting through the garbage they um there's the quality of gas that they have to guarantee um there's the sale of the recyclables you know when we talk about recycl markets being up and down that risk won't be on the county it'll be on bulk Handling Systems to Market those materials and operate the facility so those are some of the components I'm not sure if I captured them all but no I know we're

1:05:29 we're sort of putting you on the hot seat task a lot of a lot of different range of questions and I think I could uh agree with counselor Doyle here that the leate lines you know really an important part to this and you know and I understand they're kind of separate projects but I just want to plug that conversation around especially when I'm hearing what's going on in Crestville right now which you know and I know this is complicated but getting that lee8 line you know and is going to help us on a lot of different different elements we're excited about that project too mayor um before I jump to the Glenwood transfer site and then wrap this thing up um I guess my sense of this is I don't ever you know in the conversations that I see I don't hear people you know coming to some sort of agreement about

1:06:15 you know just The Narrative of actually what's going on and I don't know that that means you know this you know that you know we have the wrong facts I don't know that you know but hear a lot of questions still out there in the community and I know that the C the pressure with the tax credit is for to run here as fast as you can but there you know when I listen to what the haulers have told me you know when I you know hear what IP has said just more broadly there's still a lot of questions in the in the community about what's the benefit what are we trying to accomplish and do we have the right size of facility that makes some sort of sense here yes mayor um it it is a challenge you know with the the timelines on this project um but there are also lots of conversations happening out in the community and there are different

1:07:00 interests at play um one thing that should be acknowledged you know with solid waste while it's a utility it's Unique and that there's competition in it you know that's not happening in at the wastewater treatment plant for for example so there are different haulers um that have different interests there's different processors that have different interests and they're competing um you're you're unique here having one hauler for your community but in in Eugene there are uh three different haulers operating and so there are you know lots of conversations happening and concern about um competition between each other with our facility that we're proposing and so there are just lots of conversations happening and I'm not sure anyone's satisfied with having all the information and we're we're never going to make everybody everybody happy right but there's big differences in some of

1:07:45 the just core facts like when you tell the story um you say like that this should be a competitive advantage in the way that it drives the you know drives the uh the the the tonnage into the facility right I've yet to hear like you know when I watched the Lane County meetings I've seen it at City Club I've yet to hear anybody else but Lane County sort of say that that's true right and one of the things I'm looking for is people to kind of say the same thing and go okay yeah I could see how that's a competitive Advantage which tells me there's probably more work to be done between the county and some of these other other partners it doesn't mean that it can't be accomplished but there's still a gap there all right okay um Glennwood transfer site

1:08:30 yes um it's been a priority for this community for probably for 20 years and I just like I know there's a lot of discussions that need to be happening and we're going to be you know talking to the commission about it um it's not going to get solved tomorrow but I just want to make sure it's on the radar someplace that it's being actively worked is there you know any active work going on with the Glenwood transfer site do you want to talk to that Jeff yeah so we we uh the board did direct us to do the public Outreach survey to Dan's point I I don't think it's going to behoove us do a survey of whether or not this entire Community wants us to stay or leave Glennwood um we've we've done some work on that before what we're going to propose to do is go to them with three options um and maybe they they rank them but um so there's a

1:09:17 public outre survey that we're going to do there's also work right now with a consultant they're looking at three options one one being what it would cost to stay in Glenwood and this body may be happy to realize that seems to be the most expensive option for rebuild right now the second option to dance point would be one um new facility to replace it which would probably be out belt line 99 um area that's really the only viable area zone that would work the third option is to do one if you all were interested in that somewhere out near IP for a smaller station a larger one West Eugene that might serve the Vita Community as well with that aging so we want to so we're actively looking at Price options for all three what it would cost to build all all three of

1:10:03 those options and then have the public input on kind of preferences and and kind of determine which might work the best and then to your point look at how you fund it so I would say this is what we're proposing but we haven't moved um significantly Along on these but we're getting ready to we have been pretty focused on this project for the last few months um but plan on moving forward in that work but if there are other ways of doing this we'd love to hear your input and as I've been thinking over this over the last week I think it might be great to have a joint elected officials meeting on this where our elect body could talk to you all and and we could come to some agreement of what a vetting process would look like with some

1:10:49 concrete milestones and objectives that would would help move this along um because it has just been sitting out there for a long period of time all right that's actually really a great update so thank you both for coming out I know uh it was a little bit of round robin about you know questions but there's a lot going on and thanks for sharing the information certainly thank you for your interest and concern yeah thank you all right before we adjourn um one of the recommendations I guess I have is that is this is happening with the county right now is maybe we submit a letter to sort of summarize all all of our you know input to the county and just and ask staff to draft us a letter and I'm curious what people think of

1:11:34 that well they should address our concerns I think a letter would be appropriate so if all of us had concerns we all had questions and I think if those are delineated on a letter that would help the Commissioners see what our concerns are and be able to address them instead of after the trigger pull so Nancy could we have somebody summarize kind of where we're at and then we can and so that we can submit it to the county yes absolutely thank you all right we are adjourned for the work session um we've got about 18 minutes um before we we kick off for the regular session so we will be back in 18 minutes thank

1:12:27 or something I'm going to call the city council work session to order mayor Van Gordon here councelor Weber here councelor Mo here councelor rodley here councelor Blackwell councelor doy here and Council pisher here I won't correct the the record it is the regular meeting and councelor Blackwell is excused for the evening please join me for the Pledge of Allegiance

1:13:21 as we begin our meeting tonight there are two designated uh times for public testimony this evening under public hearings and business from the audience if you are attending in person please complete the request to speak card located at the entrance of the council chambers and give it to the city recorder if you're joining us online with a tablet smartphone or computer and wish to speak to either of those times please use the raise hand feature in Zoom the order of public testimonies is as follows anyone in the person in the council chambers and anyone who's raised their hand online first item please uh the first item is do we have a Springfield upbeat tonight uh yes we do we're giving the signal to

1:14:08 them you guys are coming right up front we right into the doors over there in the orchestra pit they I was for the record I was expecting like three people okay um which one of you wants to say what the fundraiser is for you're not playing the OSU fight song tonight just to be clear no

1:16:10 thank you very much don't go anywhere because we're gonna have the council stand up behind you so that Neil can take a picture come on it was job and if anybody on the crowd wants to uh add 500 bucks they'll play the OSU fight song I I had to try for you guys all right thank thank you guys so much for coming you did

1:17:21 [Music] great [Music] next item please uh the next it is the consent I'd like to pull item C from the consent calendar and make a motion to approve

1:18:08 the remaining items on the consent calendar second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell councelor Doyle yes and Council ponary yes motion passes five yeses zero NOS I'm the one that asked him to pull uh C Street project only because what D Street West D Street okay um Street um because I want everybody to know this was a citizen initiated project it took about three years to get this done and not everybody is happy but

1:18:54 what what we're what's going to be built in the next year $350,000 is uh pedestrian bicycle and automobile safety issues along that street and it's going to be 20 years before it really gets fixed if ever but in the meantime it's going to be a much safer Corridor which a lot of people talk about it they're very concerned about it and so we're doing something about it not everything but the city has listened to you and here we are thank you thank you and now now like to make a motion to approve item C from the consent calendar second all right me can you call a vote councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes

1:19:39 councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell councelor Doyle I and councelor pisher yes motion passes five yeses zero NOS one abent next item please next item is public hearings you have three public hearings tonight public hearing number one is annexation of territory to the City of Springfield annexing approximately 25.2 Acres of industrial property located at 5230 highbanks Road that's map 17- 02- 28- tax slot 402 and a portion of tax slot 405 this is ordinance number one an ordinance annexing certain territory vacant Parcels addressed as 5230 High Banks Road and identified as assessor map 17- 02- 28- z00 tax slot 402 and a

1:20:28 portion of tax slot 405 to the City of Springfield and will Laman Park and Recreation District adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date Andy lbert is here for the staff item thanks Neil good evening mayor and counselors um this request for annexation is for property that adjoins the former Bluewater boat site if anyone remembers that from back in the day it's now aune Foods um that portion is already annexed to the city um south of this site is the um latterday Saints Bishop Storehouse um so this particular site is a former gravel Quarry and it is being actively reclaimed as we speak under a permit from the state the

1:21:13 request for annexation is to facilitate future development of the site uh would likely require change of zoning uh to convert to U some type of industrial use such as outdoor storage uh in the meantime though this uh request for annexation uh is being presented tonight with a recommendation to continue the public hearing we do not have an executed annexation agreement right now one of the challenges that the applicant and staff face is there is not s uh storm sewer extended to this uh to this property and so need to work out the details of how storm water could be managed on the site and if necess necessary delivered to the public system in the event of of overflow uh so those are some details and intricacies that

1:21:59 staff wants to work out um it'll likely take us through Christmas break and it'll be returned to council for consideration on January 2nd so that's the recommendation before you this evening is to have the public hearing open it continue it to January 2nd allow staff and the applicant time to uh get an annexation agreement completed and before you for that second rating and adoption potentially I'd be happy to answer any questions are there any questions I think we are good okay I do know that the applicant I believe is online and may wish to present so I do I do have a question um question annexation because of storm sewers I'm not quite sure I understand that why don't we Annex it then when

1:22:45 they want to plan a development there then they have to make that connection that's correct yeah the the staff and the city through the annexation agreement want to detail and and confirm that that would be uh the responsibility of the applicant in this case because the public system just is not at their doorstep and normally um in most annexations um we're looking at sanitary sewer and and often the existing uh utilities for drainage are already in existence that is not the case here so that's something that's U being worked out i' like to see that flexibility thank you okay all right thank you Andy oh Victoria just really quick is it because of the type of uh area that it is that there couldn't be onsite retention

1:23:31 that's I'm like a that's one option and that just needs to be confirmed that that would be um because like a soakage trench or something like correct correct it's because of um you know ideally everything would be managed on site um it's a little uncertain as to because of the future development plans and you're converting it from what essentially was a pond to something that is now impervious um and the size of the area which will be at least 20 acres um of impervious surface potentially um want staff wants to be very sure that there's not drainage problems that could potentially um lead to uh impacting other sites that are not inside the ugb not not of the applicant's ownership and not within the public system that we can

1:24:17 reach so okay that's the reason for that all right last call before we let Andy uh go okay um I'm going to goe and open the public hearing I have one card it's Zach Galloway uh good evening Commissioners uh my name is Zach Galloway I'm a senior planner with tbg Architects and planners uh we're based at 132 East Broadway in Eugene uh we're representing the applicant this this evening um and so first I'd like to extend our thanks appreciation for uh your recent change to the uh fees to the annexation process

1:25:03 uh by our analysis uh and our experience Statewide uh it brings that your fees much more into alignment with what we expect to see um at in other jurisdictions so thank you for that um as you saw in the application materials uh and as you've heard from Andy uh we do largely concur with everything uh for you this evening um there are the two outstanding items uh that he has highlighted one being the um Urban facilities and services criteria uh which we think uh the application is actually sound at this point we understand City staff wants to work through those details um uh Mike reer uh who's our legal counsel is joining us as well he'll uh speak to that in more detail uh the other item is the annexation agreement uh which we're

1:25:48 meeting with staff uh next week to uh address some of the outstanding items items there so we appreciate the continued uh collaboration with City staff to get that worked out get those details hammered out um and so with that I do just want to um let you know that the applicant and myself are here to address those planning level questions uh and that Mike reader is online as legal counsel for the project uh he has a few comments as well thanks all right thank you I don't have any other cards in the room do we have anybody with their hand up they're two hands up right now um Mike re followed by Chris mallister and Mike you should be able to unmute your

1:26:35 microphone can you hear us Mike okay can you hear me yes could you state your name yeah I can hear you can you state your name and location for the record yes my name is Mike reer 375 West 4th Avenue Suite 205 Eugene Oregon 97401 I represent the applicant in this matter I'm legal counsel and um I am here tonight to talk about uh just a couple of issues the first one is the uh Urban level services and the requirement that an annexation uh be uh H have uh the capacity to have Urban level services and and those key Urban uh

1:27:20 Services include storm water what we want to do is the applicant wants to make clear is that the uh storm water can be uh retained on site and uh in addition there are other key Urban services that uh while they can be uh provided on site uh they are not necessarily required depending on the type of development that uh will occur out on this property so uh annexation is a bit different than say site review or other land use applications where detail is required to show in specific detail how the urban level services will be

1:28:06 provided uh annexation is more Broad and that is so that the uh City and or the applicant can provide those services in a timely manner uh we believe that all all Urban level services will be able to be provided in timely manner um second I wanted to talk about the annexation agreement so there are uh certain items of the annexation agreement that need to be worked out between City staff and the applicant um one of St for quite some time to uh have a path forward for developing this property as intended by the applicant

1:28:53 and we appreciate the the effort by staff and just want to uh reiterate that we have the ability to provide key Urban Services should they be necessary so if you have any questions I'm happy to uh try and provide any answers to those questions that you might have all right thank you Mike um is Chris still got his hand up yes all right okay Chris uh you should be able to unmute your microphone thank you members of the council and Mr Mayor um I understand this is a public hearing and I would just like to advise the council to not add more annexation to our community until we start to problem solve and come up with concrete

1:29:39 plans for what we're doing with the already on Annex lands or near AB budding Annex lands such as in Glennwood and along our perimeter along uh South 28th Street we are having an unmet unprecedent Ed time in terms of trying to establish with homeless services and accounting for the population that with is within our borders and I feel like uh unanswered questions which would not be allowed in Social Circles are uh are allowed to go through this process and so I feel like we need to have concrete Clans before we um approve this um we have a lot of land and a lot of access points where we did not consider these types of situations such as when we did the roundabout in Glennwood and there are dozens of people not set up with San or property who are waiting to uh Annex

1:30:25 into the city but are told that they have to wait and get50 to $100,000 to tie into existing uh infrastructure if we only uh find ways around our industrial we will lose our population I yield thank you thank you Neil is anybody else got their hand up no other hands for this item all right I move to continue the the public hearing until the city council regular session at 7 pm on Tuesday January 2nd 2024 second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor

1:31:12 Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell councelor doy I and Council pisher yes motion passes five yeses zero NOS one absent next item please next item is your public hearing number two this is annexation of territory to the City of Springfield Annex approximately 4.42 Acres of residential property located at 95466 street it's map 17- 02-27-20 two this is ordinance number two an ordinance annexing certain territory vacant partial address is 95466 6 Street and identified as assessors map 17-

1:32:01 02-27-20 two to the City of Springfield and waman Park and Recreation District withdrawing the same territory from the Mackenzie fire and rescue District adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date and Andy limbert is here for the staff item thank you U Mr Mayor and councel um this annexation request is for a rectangular piece of property at the North End of 65th Street north of thirston Road property is owned by Springfield Utility Board and it has been identified as a potential location for a Water Filtration plant would be a drinking water uh facility uh Springfield Utility Board owns the property and they're requesting annexation to facilitate uh development plans uh for the site uh there has been

1:32:46 testimony submitted including this evening you have a email that was provided uh after after the staff report was prepared it was actually from today and the um adjacent Property Owners objecting to the annexation um the annexation is One initial step to allow for future development plans to be even considered u in this area um staff has a general understanding of what the facility may look like but there have been no conceptual plans no publicly shared plans as to the intensity of the development the scale of the development um it would be presumably something similar to other sub facilities with uh

1:33:31 pump stations uh there would be Personnel at the site from time to time um some of the concerns regarding congestion and traffic and um Industrial Vehicles may or may not be realized uh once the site is in operation um a lot of automation tends to go into these sites so that's just one I guess perspective uh from the uh sub applicant that um it's not going to be a intensively occupied and utilized facility um that said it is not intended or proposed for residential use so it will be different from um the existing neighborhood that's adjoins it so um again the recommendation from staff is to continue the public hearing to

1:34:17 January 2nd the reason for this is there are issues with sanitary sewer at this location there will be treatment water uh from the future facility that'll have to be disposed of into the public sanitary sewer system um it's not toxic but it is uh contains water chemicals um Organics and the volume of um effluent is the concern not the type of effluent right now uh there are residential um scale sewer lines that are stubbed into this area and they're not they don't necessarily have the capacity to accommodate that type of uh daily water loading um on the on the system so City

1:35:02 staff and the the applicant sub as well as through the um updating of the sanitary sewer master plan that's ongoing right now are looking at a Capacity Analysis there needs to be some further work done on that to inform the annexation agreement that'll be brought back to you um hopefully EX executed um in time for the January 2nd meeting so again I'd be happy to answer any questions go Joe Andy do you have my concern is operational noises within a residential area and is that been does anybody know if there's going to be a noise and people living across the fence from

1:35:48 it um uncertain at this time um as to whether um facilities pumps for example that could be contained within a um like a masonry block structure like they are in some of the neighborhoods um could mitigate or Batten the sound sufficiently to not cause um concern to the neighborhood um some of the other unknowns include uh chemicals that might be added chlorine for example if that's added to the water system um and you know where exactly on the site and the proximity of what might be noise generating facilities to the existing homes could they be opposite corner from um closer to the school site for example as opposed to backing onto residences right now the there is really no site

1:36:33 plan but that's something that would have to be addressed um with sub and their planning for this facility in conjunction because the next steps will require public notification as well so the neighborhood will be essentially um viewing this and and responding accordingly all all along on the way so I'm concerned in regards to negatively impacting the neighborhood and their quality of life and that you know for example you know a vehicle might is if you can hear their music from a vehicle more than 50 feet away is a violation so the plant should be under those same standards if there's a something that a car can be cited for plan or stereo so loud enough to be heard 50 feet away

1:37:19 then that substation should be under that same standard because that is a quality of life issue agreed yeah correct and it's not it's not an industrially zoned property um nor would it be um if they Chang the zoning to accommodate a utility facility right so all of these things um are um I guess potential impacts that could potentially be mitigated um and sub likely uh listening to the this hearing this evening um will be well informed of the concerns of the council and in the neighborhood regarding noise odors activity traffic impacts and that sort of thing so that should hopefully help to uh in their planning for the facility down the road well if they're listening they need to hear me it's

1:38:04 saying that I will absolutely oppose this 100% if there is a negative impact to the neighbors it's it's that they didn't buy those homes thinking there's going to be a facility clean a cleaning clean water facility there and all of a sudden they have this there it's that to me I would oppose correct if it's if they can do it and and be quiet as a mouse for them that's fine understood but if not we're gonna have a problem understood yeah step doesn't does not have the I guess the necessary details as to what would comprise this there are other facilities that operate um independently and without without staff in you know adjacent to residential lots in mountain gate for example other locations where

1:38:50 there's res of our tanks so those are pumping facilities to for the pressure levels water system those are up in the woods and away from houses correct so so I'm just putting it laying that groundw out now so that way it's not a surprise to anybody absolutely at the next reading because I'm G to be asking the same question I know that your concerns are shared by The Neighborhood okay Victoria um with all due respect on this conversation that you guys are having I don't see how that is stuff that we should be talking about when it comes to the annexation I understand and when it comes development but as part of the the criteria for an annexation what's being developed in there usually shouldn't even be factored in should it I mean is it part of the criteria in Springfield that you look at that uh no it's just a matter of whether

1:39:36 it can be served with Urban Services okay so that's what that's what I'm asking like I I'm not saying I I just I don't disagree with the this the sound stuff I'm just saying that shouldn't be part of our decision making when it comes to whether or not we're going to Annex this property in or not I guess it is it is fair to to I guess raise the issue because it was raised in testimony um so council picar is acknowledging I guess the testimony that was provided this evening which does deal with quality of life issues you it's correct it's not a criteria but I guess it's a consideration down the road so the public hearing is the opportunity for the neighborhood to be heard and to express their concerns and hopefully those concerns will be listened to and addressed through site planning and other mitigation sure I just think that

1:40:21 this public needs to know that we have specific things that we have to when we say yes or no it's because we're basing it on what we have in front of us that we're allowed to judge that situation on so agree Council has more latitude than staff does in in reviewing this so that's I understand Joe go ahead so for the record I'm not saying I oppose it I'm just putting that information out so it's out there and they can be considering that as it moves forward because that will come up at some point understood staff takes that advisement thank you all right any other questions before we open the public hearing all right then I'm going to open the public hearing I don't have think I have any

1:41:07 cards I don't have any public uh cards in the uh in the council chambers is there anybody online yes we have one speaker Chris mallister and Chris you should be able to unmute your microphone thank you Neil thank you Mr Mayor members of the council I support uh councelor Doyle's comments on this and that there are items that need to be considered on the public record and I wish that there was such opposition for quality of life in other parts of our system such as the annexation of Glennwood so I'd like to see that this is the type of conversation that continues to happen as we look at expanding our footprint and I appreciate the work that the staff and sub have put into on trying to expand our bound and better serve our entire Community

1:41:53 including increasing access to sanitation and other clean water supports as those are often used as complaints about expanding our services to help our indigenous peoples so I support this concept whereas I'm still not uh favored for um for-profit uh annexations this seems like a public good and a public interest thank you for your time and your service Neil do we have anybody else uh no their hands for this item I'd like to make a motion to move this to continue to the public I move to continue the public hearing until the city council regular session at 7M on Tuesday January 2nd 2024 second Neil could you call the vote

1:42:38 please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell councelor Doyle I and coun pisher yes thank you motion passes five yeses zero NOS one absent next item please next item is public hearing number three that's the annexation of territory to the City of Springfield Annex approximately 0.86 Acres of residential property located at 1010 Kinsley Avenue map 18-20 6-24 taxl 3800 and concurrently Annex an abing 45 foot wide by approximately 213 foot long segment of Kinsley Avenue public RightWay this is ordinance number three

1:43:24 an ordinance annexing certain territory residential parcel addressed as 1010 Kinsley Avenue and identified as assessor map 18- 02-06 d24 tax light tax slot 3800 and an abing segment of Kinsley Avenue public right of way to the City of Springfield withdrawing the same territory from the Willakenzie rural Fire Protection District adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date and Andy limbert is here for this item to complete the trifecta tonight um this proposed annexation this annexation request is for property right at the corner of Kinsley Avenue in Jasper Road uh recently the sanitary sewer was extended south from Jasper Road along

1:44:11 Kinsley Avenue to serve the Mountainville subdivision which you can see developing on the west there uh many of the lots are actually built on right now and so this was one of the primary impetus reasons for the applicant to request annexation they don't have to extend the sewer on their own actually a sewer connection was stubbed into their front property and so they're requesting the anation to facilitate connection of the existing house to sanitary sewer they also have approximately half of the property is vacant uh so there is further development potential on this property and that's the other reason um is to possibly partition property or add more dwelling units on the site um the concurrent annexation of Kinsley Avenue

1:44:56 is to bring it into the city limits um there are City facilities there it is not fully developed but south of this uh property um the new Mountainville subdivision did improve the Western half of Kinsley Avenue there's curb gutter sidewalk there So eventually with further development on this property there will be curb gutter sidewalk and that will ow for um Urban Street improvements along the front edge um so that's the request it's a private property owner that's making the request this evening and again staff is recommending um continuing this to January 2nd just to be consistent with the other properties there are no particular outstanding issues with this property uh the applicants agreed to the

1:45:42 annexation agreement I believe it's in your packet this evening they will be pursuing Plumbing permits to get the um house connected decommissioning septic that sort sort of thing um similar to a health hazard annexation this can proceed um in advance of concluding the annexation they've got it underway um once they pay the necessary fees then that connection can occur and then the annexation can be concluded uh by the council later uh so again I'd be happy to answer any questions if you have tonight Joe just quick does this have does this property have anything to do with the liid we did back several years ago for that southern edge of Road uh not this particular location um there are other areas just to the east

1:46:27 right of this location where along oage and I believe 4 it's a little bit further east um than this where there was that connection in this case it was the developer initiated in um construction of the sanitary sewer which will benefit other residents on Kinsley should they choose to Annex and connect thank you any other questions okay I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing uh we don't have any cards in the room are there any hands hands i' like to make a motion to continue the public hearing until the city council regular session at 7 pm on Tuesday January 2nd 2024 second Neil

1:47:12 could you call the vote please councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councel Blackwell councelor Doyle hi and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes five yeses zero NOS one absent next item please next item is business from the audience do we have any cards in Clair all right well good evening Mr Mayor and counselors my name is Travis stclair I

1:47:57 was uh born here in in Oregon and lived in Lane County since 1984 or yes right about then kind of dating myself I'm here to express my concern about the IM Earth program that you heard about earlier um I believe that it'll impact my job in the recycling industry and I believe the Lane County already has a number of important projects in the works that should take priority of it um in 1996 I began my career in recycling at that time we were at a small location over in Eugene today we are in our third location in Springfield out at 48th in G in G excuse me um we have been collecting

1:48:43 recyclables in this community uh all of those years and sending the material into the Springfield Mill it has been recycled here locally it's actually new paper before it even leaves our community the vast majority is is sorry I jumped uh jumped all over myself a little bit of nerves there uh not only is this en environmentally responsible uh by limiting the impact of the trucks that are on the road but it also provides many living wage jobs here in our area and to that as a single father my two my career has provided for my two children not only in the financial means to support my family but in many times

1:49:29 support the social support from those that I've worked on worked with for decades now they are far more than just co-workers they are my friends they are my family my children are now grown on their own my son is making his career at the same location looking to begin his family this this site supports almost 30 families and their Futures with the living wage great benefits while supporting the sustainability goals of our community I just do not see this as the right solution for the residents of Lane County and I urge the Springfield City Council to ask our County Commissioners to postpone this proposal and work with Industries like International Paper

1:50:16 to help achieve the sustainability goals we're already working working on and uh meet those objectives thank you for your time this evening thank you all right that was the only card in the room do we have any hands there's one hand raised it's Chris mallister and Chris you should be able to unmute your microphone Mr Mayor members of the council uh Springfield staff I'm honored to be a Springfield resident and citizen I was born in the hospitals here I went to the schools here and I choose to try my trades whether they are social service or Community Building within our borders that said I am very troubled by

1:51:01 the fact that with some of our counselors quality of life only extends to housed people we had a young man commit suicide two days ago who was not able to come into a springfi place even though his parents were displaced in the guest house foreclosure with the comination rather we are struggling to keep our Springfield tax base inside our city uh limits we are struggling to build opportunities within our ugb which is the only places where our un hous are told to be we go and we respond to calls to the quaries to the paper mills to the parks we pull our people out of the street when they're at the post office because they're too unsightly for people to be able to do their business we beg for places to have

1:51:47 people go when it's too cold to be outside and that's relative depending on your age and your vulnerability if you are 50 but you have hepatitis C and are on meds and diabetic and have no legs your options are very limited and the offer of a top bunk at the navigation Center on 100 River Avenue only goes so far when you can't even lift yourself up above the bar our people deserve better I had to hospice one of my teaching AIDS in one of my shelters last year it almost broke me because this was a man who worked with are development dis developmentally disabled to help give them a second chance here in Springfield and yet we did not have a place for him to be I had to put him in another city another person over 20 years in

1:52:33 Springfield a veteran of our country had to die alone in a hotel room in Junction City during the marathon because we didn't have any place for him to be now I understand that there's a fear of Outsiders there's a fear of change I remember back in in the day when I was growing up in this town where we took care of our own where we solved problems and where we worked with everybody I really wish that we had that kind of conversation happening instead of send your troubles to Eugene send your people to Eugene not our problem whether they are in RVs or on our streets because there's no place to be or when it's cold enough to activate the volunteers not paid staff not emergency staff but volunteers often in our seniors population that's when I know

1:53:20 that we have gone too far away from our Roots I implore every single person who is elected in this town to remember who your people are they are not the County's people they are your people they are your ward they are your future Generations they are our graduating class they are our next Builders welders and teachers please let our people grow thank you are there any more hands up Neil no more hands for this item okay is there any Council response all right next item please uh next item is correspondence and petition

1:54:05 there's one item there it's a copy of a letter sent to the Lane County Board of Commissioners on September 25th 2023 and updated on November 1st 2023 I'd like to make a motion to accept for filing the correspondent of petition to the Commissioners second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell Council Doyle hi and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes five yeses zero knows one absent next item please next item is ordinances you have five ordinances this evening ordinance number one

1:54:50 a comprehensive plan map clarification project this is ordinance number four amending the Eugene Springfield metropolitan area General plan or the metro plan and Springfield comprehensive plan to adopt the Springfield comprehensive plan map and land use element amending the downtown refinement plan Gateway refinement plan Glenwood refinement Plan East Kelly but refinement Plan East Main refinement plan mid Springfield refinement plan and Q Street refinement plan amending the Springfield development code adopting a severability clause and a savings clause and providing an effective date and Chelsea Hartman is here for this item good evening mayor and counselors I'm really glad you had to read all of that and not me tonight um so repeat that

1:55:41 please um this is a followup to the October 16th joint meeting with the board uh all of the materials are largely the same from that meeting I just wanted to highlight some new information so so no public comment was received at that public hearing or following it um staff did Identify some changes to the ordinance to make its effective date March 1st 2024 and to include a savings Clause that allows for any adopted amendments to the metro plan diagram or any of the refinement plan diagrams that are adopted between the adoption of this ordinance and its effective date um to be reflected in the comprehensive plan map so just allowing any amendments that occur in that time to remain effective uh we also updated the staff report to finalize it so that it's reflecting

1:56:26 adoption and rather than a a proposal um and lastly after Council adopts the ordinance the board is scheduled to take action on the Lan County ordinances that are related to this project on January 9th 2024 and short and sweet are there any questions I just have one brief comment thank you for this right like I I know it's a pretty technical um piece of work but you know and all the work that we want to be competitive make the city more competitive for development and economic development this kind of stuff really does help so I appreciate it thank you Steve this is remarkable what we did every refinement plan has been modified to some little degree not a whole lot a

1:57:11 lot of them need need more change in the future but what happened was when we had when we went through this nobody came and testified against it or for it that sort of bothers me a little bit because this is an opportunity for them to have a say in this stuff and they didn't take it uh maybe later on they'll wish they had but we're doing the best we can to represent them so thank you thank you I'd like to make a motion to adopt ordinance number four second could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell councelor Doyle hi and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes five yeses zero NOS one absent

1:57:58 next item please next item is ordinance number or item number two the storm water post construction requirements update this is ordinance number five an ordinance amending the Springfield development code related to post construction site runoff and storm water management for new development and Redevelopment adopting a savings clause and a severability clause and providing an effective date haly Campbell is here for this item good evening mayor and counselors um as discussed in in the report um this was a part of the permit the ms4 permit um the council held a j a joint work session and public hearing with the board on November 6th uh no p no public

1:58:43 comment was provided during the hearing or after the hearing uh staff updated the staff report uh for just to show that the amendments were adopted rather than proposed those are the only changes made um and we expect that the third reading uh for the ordinance will be with the board on December 12 2024 there any questions December 12 2024 I'm sorry 2023 I apologize long government time is slow but that slow you caught me yes I'd like to make a motion to adopt ordinance number five please second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell councelor Doyle

1:59:29 I and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes five yeses zero NOS one absent next item please your third item is the parking code Amendment this is the climate friendly and Equitable communities uh ordinance number six an ordinance amending the Springfield development code related to on-site parking regulations as required by the Oregon transportation planning rule adopting a savings clause and a severability clause and providing an effective date and Drew Larson is here for this item thank you Neil Mr Mayor City councilors this is the second reading regarding the climate friendly and Equitable communities uh parking reform the we did discuss there was a couple changes in the legislative that we did discuss in the first reading regarding parking lots

2:00:15 over a half acre uh as well as updating the report um reflecting the permanent rules that were adopted on November 2nd the staff report had previously spoken to the rules that were proposed but they have been officially uh adopted by the state and so the staff report has been amended to reflect that thank up I'd like to make a motion to adopt ordinance number six second Neil can you call the vot please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor Broadley yes councelor Blackwell councelor Doyle I and councelor pisher yes thank

2:01:01 you motion passes five yeses zero NOS one absent next item please item number four is minor code amendments this is ordinance number seven an ordinance amending the Springfield development code correct minor errors and omissions in ordinance 6443 adopting a savings clause and sever clause and providing an effective date and Mark R is here for this item um before Mark starts Neil is everybody in Pascal's group presenting tonight I think we might have left one or two people out but for the most part all right go ahead Mark I was gonna say we all get a chance tonight so keep the face fresh in front of you tonight I'll keep mine really short and sweet nothing has changed from this um matter since it was before you and joint with the Board

2:01:46 of Commissioners on November 6th um we have received no public comments there was no testimony at the public hearing and we do expect the board to hear this also on December 12 2023 and with that um be happy if you adopt the ordinance tonight happy to answer any questions I don't see any questions uh I'd like to make a motion to adopt ordinance number seven second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor Radley yes councel Blackwell councelor Doyle hi and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes five yeses zero NOS one absent next item please um this is item number five the

2:02:31 fire code ordinance Corrections this is ordinance number 8 an ordinance to amend ordinance number 6458 relating to the adoption of the 2022 Springfield Fire code by adopting amending or adding sections of the 2021 international fire code or the if c as promulgated by the International Code Council and as adopted and amended by the state of Oregon as the 2022 Oregon fire code or the ofc and Christina KZ is online for this item well good evening mayor and Council I do consider that Neil has to read those titles when I write these ordinances um but this one was shorter than it could have been the ordinance

2:03:17 before you tonight is a essentially a housekeeping um set of Corrections to the fire code that the council adopted on June 5th 2023 via ordinance uh 6458 and that became effective August 1st the purpose of these amendments is to match the Springfield Fire code more completely to the one that was adopted in Eugene just based on different processes and different timelines the city of Eugene's code was um enacted later in the summer before the August 1 deadline and in the process of getting Eugene's ready to go there was um just some further corrections made to clarify definitions some better reorganizing of the code and so the intent of this ordinance is just to um change what was adopted in June to

2:04:04 match what Eugene has adopted and that is because Eugene Springfield Fire is a combined functionally combined department and Eugene Springfield Fire Marshall enforces the fire code on behalf of both cities so if there are any questions I'm happy to answer what I can otherwise our fire marshal uh Chief Worthington is also here on the audience and can answer any substantive questions that you have about the code um from my perspective none of the changes um are rise to the level of being differences and policies between what was adopted in June versus today all right are there any questions all right this is no action required first reading only next item please any business from the city

2:04:54 council go ahead I do uh I I sometimes go to these subcommittees that we have and I often go to the police task force commune I'm not part of it I sit back as part of the audience and so a couple months ago our chief of police gave a u report on the policy manual very very well done but what I was struck by was got down to the minority section where absolutely equal treatment to every Everybody all the time period and then he then he said this he says if you don't feel that way you can complain to the police department you can complain to the city you can complain to the state then he said I hope they call me first because I want to know I like

2:05:45 that all right Victoria just really quick I wanted to say that I um had the pleasure of um attending a um graduation at the fire department where we had four recruits that um the way I understood it it's a fairly new program for EMTs and these were folks that um sort of forego or I don't how to put that going into the full uh paramedic firefighter program to help facilitate and start this program and so um I just wanted to give a shout out to those people and just say great job to the uh fire department I'm really proud to have um these First Responders that work for our city okay anybody else all right um I did get a note from Cornerstone

2:06:30 Community Housing today um they announced that they have achieved funding for their Springfield departments which is um a development up on 16th Street um that we've been talking to them about that public private part partnership in that open land for a very long time I'm very excited for them it's going to provide some needed housing to the to the community all right next item please any business from the city manager no business excuse me no business this evening all right and any business from the city attorney no business all right that looks like a wrap on everything thank you everybody have a great night we are insurance