Springfield City Council — May 20, 2024

0:04 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 here councelor Doyle here and councelor pisher here did you hear me yes we did you were coming in loud and clear oh sorry my video won't go we have two work session items tonight uh first one is SPD accreditation Award with Lieutenant Crowley and chief Shear Chief you weren't on the uh the official Billet for

0:52 this good evening Council mayor and thank you for allowing us the time to evening to share with you all our recent agency accreditation efforts with me tonight is Lieutenant George CW who among many of his other duties was assigned the task of leading our department effort to achieve accreditation accreditation establishes a set of best practices that creates consistent and measurable standards that are verifiable by independent body and in March of 20123 we began this effort and in April of 2024 we were presented our accreditation credential by the Northwest accreditation Alliance the executive director for the alliance Scott Hayes is present tonight remotely uh to explain a little more in detail about the accreditation process of being accredited benefits an agency and the ongoing process to achieve re accreditation at regular intervals so

1:38 with that I will go ahead and turn it over to Scott Hayes uh thank you Chief good evening mayor counselors and members of the community as introduced I am Scott hayy executive director for the Northwest accreditation Alliance I appreciate the opportunity to address the council and present the Springfield Police Department with its first award of accreditation under the leadership of CH Chief Andrew Shear law enforcement is experienced a changing Society with increased demands replace accountability and transparency as in our past our profession must face these challenges and work with our community to address their concerns accreditation is one step towards building Community Trust and the

2:23 legitimacy of our profession the Northwest accreditation Alliance was formed under the direction of the Oregon Association of chiefs of police the Oregon State Sheriff's Association and the association of Public Safety Communications officials and provides accreditation services for 94 law enforcement and communication centers accreditation goals are straightforward to support the continued Improvement of law enforcement services to establish best practice through Professional Standards establish agency accountability and trans transparency and enhanced management of operations for the Springfield Police Department to become accredited it had to adhere to 108 en uh law enforcement

3:10 standards compliance is generally in the form of policies and procedures and adherence to organ revised statutes organ administrative rules and City policy our standards are established through the best practice both nationally and through changes in federal and Oregon law in addition to each of the 108 standards the agency must also show proof of compliance that it is following policy and best practice then re accreditation will occur every 3 years this is really a Monumental step for any agency to be evaluated by an outside independent organization and have its policies and its procedures scrutinized I know that there are a

3:55 number of Staff involved in the process but I would also like as the chief did to recognize the efforts of Lieutenant George Crowley who worked diligently to prepare the agency for the review so Chief cheer on behalf of the Northwest accreditation Alliance and its 24 member board of directors I would like to congratulate you and the city on you receiving your first award of credit AG thank you Scott and um just to Echo what Scott said I can't thank George Crawley enough he really for the last year has been this has been his full-time job to get us to this point now there's a lot of people involved in reviewing policies and training documents and all that kind of stuff but George has really run point on this effort and has worked very hard to get

4:41 this accomplished in approximately a year and it typically takes much longer than that to get accredited so I just wanted to publicly recognize him for the good work he's done and with that if you have any questions we'll be glad to answer them does anybody have any questions Victoria so I just want to say congratulations on that I worked really hard on an apwa accreditation for the City of Eugene and I know how much work goes into that and we had probably 15 20 people working on that so for just one person to have to put all that together that's a ton of work and you guys are awesome thanks so much for your hard work thank you Joe yes thank you um I I uh Echo Victoria's words that's that's amazing that you guys did that um and I also I think what needs to be pointed out too

5:26 is that not only is the police end of our City Public Safety Police Department the jail is also accredited as as well through a different standard through the Oregon jail standards those are also very very rigorous and for the police side of things to be accredited is huge I believe it or not I I read to that whole report and uh that was a lot of reading a lot of work and my tip my hat off to you George amazing work and thank you chief for supporting him him throughout that entire time and I think it says a lot for our city and uh it just speaks well to how things are being run in our PD now I just very very proud of of you guys and the agency

6:11 itself thank you appreciate that Cory thank you um just to just pile on the praise uh I also I really appreciate this work as someone who you all get to hear me say I'm like I love a process and I love a plan and a place to to grow from and build from and just know that the process of going through this is also I mean the process is is a big piece of the work too in the fact that now we have all of these policies in place and I was reading through it and you know it talks about how we manage money and how we manage people and all of these pieces and I just all of the the congratulations and appreciation because I think this is

6:56 just another step in the direction that we're all trying to go in terms of the transparency and the the relationship with the community and how we do Public Safety in Springfield and I just appreciate it so much and thank you thank you I heard three years mentioned in there what what did that mean every three years you have to go through a re accreditation process so you have to show that you've maintained the standards that you've set and they come out and I'm told and Scott correct me if I'm wrong that the re accreditation process for some can even be more rigorous than the original accreditation process so it's no joke to maint it's no joke to get this and it's definitely no joke to try to maintain it so we have to keep our standards very high thank you Beth I just want to say nice work you guys

7:42 congratulations Michelle I can't go without saying congratulations too I mean we need a full Full Slate here so great work I the thing I want to point out is how important the actual getting ready for accreditation is right like the the awards the outcome it is how much time you guys spent going through basically everything and looking at it and improving and this is just continues to be the uh you know a a lot of work that we're putting into PD and it's definitely showing in in the community I appreciate it um I I think it's really important to note it's it's really the process that gets you guys there and I was glad to see it all right I think that is

8:27 it thank you all right the next we thing we have is uh review of city council operating procedures with Mary Bridget Smith and we do this annually not every three years all right good evening mayor and Council can you hear me okay okay I'm just GNA get set up here so we

9:12 are um doing a work session on the annual review of your operating policies and procedures I have a PowerPoint prepared mainly to keep myself on track um but certainly ask questions um as we uh go through this but my intent is to um talk to you about the proposed changes for the operating policies and procedures for the year get your feedback on any other changes you would like to see or other issues you'd like me to look into so to just kind of set the stage here for what we're trying to do today these are the rules for how you uh conduct your business and you know Council meetings are important the majority of the work that happens that the uh City heads through a council meeting in one way or the other whether

9:57 it's through a contract approval or a dispersal or decision by the council um mainly your operating policies and procedures deal with how meetings work and how they're structured but there are other sections in there about um the boards and commissions reimbursements speaking on behalf of the council so a few administrative things are in there as well this is a requirement from the charter uh to annually review your operating policies and procedures and then lastly you know these really vary by jur jurisdiction uh one thing we do when we're reviewing these is try and compare and see what other jurisdictions are doing and it's always sort of interesting to see you can kind of tell if a jurisdiction has worked through an issue you know sometimes then that shows up in their rules so um we do pull a lot from other

10:45 jurisdictions from the league of Oregon cities and other sources but at the end of the day these are really the rules that this group used to get their business done so they don't have to be the same as other um jurisdictions I did want to take a minute and just sort of go through some of the highlights of some of the things you've done in the past uh few years in relation with your operating policies and procedures and how you do your work some of the things include the council vacancy process having some more language in there about how a vacancy um how that process will work shifting to remote meetings uh media executive sessions the security and sergeant of arms language was updated and then having a direct reference to uh public official legal OB ations that's a real

11:30 lawyer sentence there but that's talking about public official ethics uh anti-discrimination laws and public meetings and public records and those obligations that you as counselors have um to uphold those so looking at the um changes one of the main things was to uh work on boards and commissions and committees this was a discussion in direction from your 2023 Retreat actually the main points are there that's to continue to interview new applicants for bcc's uh the mayor does retain the discretion to not have to uh reinter somebody who's reapplying as you know

12:15 people can be on a uh board uh for two terms in a row and then to discontinue what we were calling the batch Recruitment and that was when we were trying to have all the recruitments occur in November and then do one maybe in the spring depending on the vacancies so no more batch recruitment what we'll do now is just recruit as openings occur um when I was looking at the operating policies I realized that this section we had it just had become a little bit of a Frankenstein uh you know when you um tweak sections by section sometimes it just doesn't really hang together and so what I'm proposing is the to do the redraft of that section n that's in your packet that takes the um

13:00 current language moves it around gets rid of the redundancies and also tries to set out the different types of committees to sort of set the table a little bit so we're clear in our heads when we're talking about something like the budget committee and the Planning Commission as opposed to the museum committee and I think that just helps a little bit in terms of decision making I was wondering if anybody had questions about bcc's or any other things that you wanted to see um included anybody have questions great okay then moving forward for some of your uh followup from the 2024 Retreat that you just had I wanted to highlight two um areas one has a proposed change

13:46 one is just to make sure that um that the council is clear on the process so the first is talking about council meeting agenda setting and that's in section 351 that talks about the process of getting things on the agenda so if you look at those rules the first part talks about you know things that you where you give direction at work session well then those items have to come back often to the regular session to have official action so this is a perfect example of that I'm talking to you about your operating policies you'll provide me with Direction I'll come back in June and ask for a vote and that will be the official action that adopts the policies the other way that things get on the agenda is through um Council leadership so that would be the mayor or the council president can ask to put things

14:32 on the agenda they're supposed to run it through um one another so it has sort of a check then the other way that things can come on is if a counselor brings something to council Leadership Council leadership may say no we don't think that should come up right now then that counselor can go to the full Council and if it gets a majority of the council then that item can be placed on the agenda if that H I have not seen that happen very often but I would tell you probably what I would would recommend is that that counselor do that in an open session like business from the council talks about hey this is XYZ issue I'd like to talk about it for here and then I if I were at the meeting you know in my role as City attorney I'd recommend you do a vote and then get that uh approval and then city manager like okay

15:18 great put it on the agenda and it moves forward the other way that things get on the agenda would be you know more an administrative role either through the city manager or through legal requir ments so if you look at our agendas there are always lots of things on there that um you know we see come up quite a bit you know dispersements contract approval um other things that make the city run those don't have to go through like a you know check with a policy maker like should we have this on the agenda the city manager can just have those things scheduled often we'll have them scheduled either months um ahead of time or we'll know you know this time of year is when we do this sort of meeting so that's um getting something on the agenda um and I I think there was some

16:04 discussion about that at the 2024 Retreat the second uh issue is a recommended change I have about remote attendance at meetings and that's this is the section um 3.31 I think it is and it talks about it sort of restates the council's obligation to attend a meeting and ask that they tell the recorder ahead of time if they're going to be remote I think that's a leftover from preco remote meetings when setting up the tech for that took a little more work and so the recorder wanted to heads up so they could get the I mean we used to have like a phone and you know it was always kind of difficult to make that work but now people can um counselors have the flexibility to attend remotely at their discretion and so it's not

16:49 really language that's serving and it would be my recommendation to remove it so go ahead um no I think the new language looks looks good I guess I'm thinking about we it might still just be a best practice to sort of let somebody know because I think the they still have to look for that person yes and so I don't know if it is a strong as it used to be right because we don't like nobody needs to give permission to attend remotely but I think it's that just kind of that prompt to go okay we still got to tell somebody at City Hall otherwise we're going they're going to expect me to walk through the door right in the uh in the virtual crowd yeah

17:41 okay all right and then more 2024 followup would be um there was one issue it looked like relating back to boards and commissions it looked like there was some conversation about maybe having alternates on certain Council committees and I didn't know if the council wanted to have further discussion about that or if that was just something that people were um talking about but I thought it just might be good to bring it up here and see what you guys think and it was my understanding it was just for Council subcommittees like um finance and Judiciary and legislative would be the two that you um standing ones that you have now any feedback on that or ideas any opinions go ahead I'm trying to remember the conversation at the retreat but I do

18:26 remember us talking about it and it was particularly for those um thinking about um especially and we'll see if we get to it here especially if we go to you know just doing it not necessarily by Ward I think there was talk about what it be helpful to have um on the Planning Commission or whatever to have people who were alternates but we never talked about what would that mean like would that mean that that alternate had to go to meetings right would that mean you know so what would it mean to to actually fully step in as an alternate so I think it's it's unfinished in of and maybe people changed their minds but I remember us just mentioning that like how do we keep things moving along smoothly but never got into the Weeds about it

19:12 okay thank you mayor um point of clarification um that uh observation came from councelor Blackwell actually who was not able to attend the retreat but we had um kind of a debrief prior to and you know uh councelor blackw I don't know if you want to expand on that but the general gist of it is you know we do these recruitment processes it takes you know um time for the applicants and the council could we establish something similar to like what we do in human resources which is called like a hiring list so you can retain a list for a certain period of time and then if for some reason um unexpectedly a uh Committee Member is not able to attend or fulfill the duties um of that committee then we can move to somebody else that's been previously approved on

19:59 that slate of candidates if we're fortunate to have a slate Beth and I can elaborate on that yes so that wasn't another Council filling in for a position that was came out of the um Arts Commission in one of our meetings they were talking about having um there was somebody that may need to step away because of obligations but still is very skilled and would love to participate so could there um could there be a situation where they can still St in at times and participate could there be someone that you know we had just went through a a an appointing you know we had appointed um a gentleman and there was another one um that had applied but we didn't have a space for that person and then this came out

20:45 afterwards that someone might be leaving again and could there be you know a list where where we could fill that position from that list maybe instead of going back out for um recruiting again when they've already went through the process they've already applied you know she was also a very good candidate good fit so that was a thought on that uh Joe yeah thank you I I um can see what you're saying Beth and I concur um to a degree in a sense that um I would be a little bit I don't know if skeptical is even the right word um if in regards to having a person step away come back step away and come back so to speak as opposed to are you talking about um

21:31 having a fill in as opposed to someone leaving and then coming and then having them as a as a backup to to take that position into you know for the rest of the term I'm not sure exactly what you what you're saying well maybe there are two different things maybe one was um one was where he could step away and come back and fill in at times and then one is a situation where there was maybe a list that they could Phil from that had already interviewed and was approved okay so I I for a vacancy yes no I I think it'd be great if we had a a list so to speak we just I think we need to be cautious in regards to how we create that list because there's some

22:16 people that are that interview that are passed up because we don't think there'd be a great placement so I think when there's interviews then we need to have that secondary discussion as far as okay to wom I'm going to put this place or this person on a list I'm I'm fine with that I think it's a good idea um but I don't know if I I would want to have people stepping away and coming back and stepping away when yeah I think I I think they were just saying there they do so so much they need hands on a lot of like hands on deck for a lot of the um a lot of their events and getting you know hands on deck is kind of difficult so they they had more people to pull from at certain times it would be helpful I think behind that if we had a special event could see that but as far as just filling in I don't know if

23:01 that'd be great but I I do totally concur with having creating a list to um fill vacancies as they as they occur totally thanks I appreciate us kind of sort of teasing it out a little bit here um I think that having a having a list of folks who were like those would be really great but we're going to choose this other person is great as long as somebody's going to manage it I mean that's the thing about those those kind of things it's like oh you know we're going to we're going to manage that list and figure it out um and is it going to be for specific committees or all committees or um it'd really just be nice if we were keeping track of people who volunteers with these committees and

23:46 are you know sharing information with them however I also kind of agree with Joe the sort of move stepping in and stepping back my concerns about that are are you know if somebody has to pull away because their life has changed I think they could still come back in the next term right they can still reapply and it's just that so much happens in terms of like group dynamics that maybe if there it's like that where they're like I can't be the chair or I can't be a part of this but I still would come and help with events then that's something that the the committee staff or whatever could could do I think that um just being really clear about because we we do so much to be so clear about what the expectations of the Committees are and when people need to show up and and all of that that just the coming and

24:32 going could kind of mess with the flow but I'm all for having a list or alternates to pull from I think I'm good I think I'm good with a A list not good with the alternates and the other thing that I think about is that sort of coming and going piece there's some of these U committees like the Planning Commission that has you know ethical compliance paperwork they have to get keep keep filed right so different committees have different require requirements so um I think if we if we had that we're going to go to a a pre-approved list especially if somebody you know sort of has to leave suddenly that would be fine the other question that I that I had is how long would that list be active right because to me it feels like maybe a

25:17 quarter that that list could still be active like long enough that it's still sort of fresh opposed to a sort of cold calling somebody you know a year after the fact and saying hey do you want to be on Planning Commission uh anybody Victoria talked and I forgot what I was gonna say Beth that's something I wanted to add to that that was one thing that they had kind of brought up like even if the list was three months or something because we had interviewed two great candidates we chose one and then one person said you know this is a little more than I thought it was going to be and life's busy and I think I'm gonna have to step away and that other person may have been able to Poss step into that role so that was kind of that that's what sparked that conversation I

26:03 guess so Joe yes thank you and and I I totally see what you're saying Beth and I agree with what you're saying um and I think to uh mayor is that uh and councelor rodley that I think that we could put a expiration on that list and we could look at probably the the best way to do that maybe through whatever agender review or whatever but um all the Committees so to speak they have uh term limits or timeouts expirations on terms fairly frequently and if we have a committee of eight people we can pretty much count on someone having you know tering out every year so um but I think that once a quarter or once every six

26:48 months at the max we could or should have a list and that would sure I think would help staff and just planning for all this movement and all the time it takes I think three I'm fine with whatever term but I don't think we should leave them on there for more than you know for a year but I think three months or you know a quarter or half a year at the most I'm totally fine with okay Mary Bridget is that enough to sort of go forth and design some sort of language that will be on by yeah I think we had some um conversations offline with the city Recorder about this I don't think you have to add this to your rules you could just decide to have a list that you know you keep for six months and if a if a recruitment comes up Alison can check that list and say oh

27:33 hey so and so might be interested and then and then see at that time you can make a decision like oh hey you know what nobody else is interested so maybe we move forward or we have like a bunch of candidates and maybe you want to think about that differently but that makes sense especially volunteers I know it's so people are moving around and the average recruitment how long does that actually take from the moment we put it out until we actually see you know have completed the appointment if you want to check me on this but I would say when youed to do batch like they would go out in August and then you'd be interviewing maybe in November and appointing I think that's right yeah okay and appointing then November December Victoria yeah I remembered I hate this getting old stuff um so my question was if we interview a couple

28:18 people one person we choose but we kind of had a tough time between the two because we liked both of them why wouldn't that person be approved so to speak from the council and then that be given to to the staff person and then it's the they should I'm wondering why do they have to come back to us for that yeah so the um that's great question so the process is is that someone is appointed by the council at a um regular session that's from the charter that says uh you're going to have um now I got to remember the it says the mayor can create its own committees and then um appoints people as per your rules your rules say that all appointments flow through the council because it's a council committee so let's say you had that great number two candidate right an opening comes up shortly after then

29:05 Allison could bring that to a gender interview say hey so and so you know could pop into this position then that could go to the council to consider without an interview and just go ahead and appoint that person at the next regular session so it's because of the way it's written that it has to come back to the council because I mean we have a million things it's like we've already made that decision why does it have to come back through the council again and that's because the yeah the role of the council and that it's their committee and it's their committees and that they are appointing the people but it's just really a committies is something I can tell you that varies by jurisdiction certainly there are not not all jurisdictions do that but some do okay thank you Joe I'm just thinking U Mary Bridget that's something that seems like we could just slap on the consent calendar can't we yeah you probably could yeah so

29:52 it wouldn't need a discussion or any of that just we can throw it on the consent counter counselors can read the consent calendar if they have any issues with it they can pull it from the consent calendar have discussion or not and just have it appointed that way sure all right I I think we're ready for the next one okay uh all right moving on to the next exciting topic here would be letters of support um so this was another uh topic that I saw on the retreat minutes and I thought I would just take a minute to talk a little bit about how letters kind of how letters asking for City support sort of come to the city and the differences between them and then see if there's a little process Improvement we can do here for the rest of the council so um there are

30:38 uh many requests for letters that come to the council for example for I don't know if ceremonial is the right word but you know the mayor the city could write a letter on behalf of you know like like on the agenda tonight you have Public Works week and EMS week you know things that are show um support of a ongoing cause here in our city but aren't particularly political and something that would just be a nice thing to have a nice letter from the mayor that says hey we all support X Y and Z so the way the rules work those can go through without having to come back to the council and have a vote right because it's not something that really is a policymaking issue where you're all going to want to weigh in it would look like hey this is from the council but I think um it sounds like it would be helpful for the rest of the council to make sure that you got a copy of those

31:23 letters so if a constituent was like hey I saw that you did this letter you you would know and maybe there's been a gap there so we could definitely work on that then the other type of letters are letters that are more concrete um showing of what um the council's position is on an issue those come to you the letter comes to you you vote on it if it's not unanimous and they we're supposed to put on the bottom there you know what the vote was so I think probably the last one was um about the uh uh Glenwood U transfer station and the I think that was the last example so those are ones that come to the council there're a statement of the Council on a particular position then the other types of letters are more what you would think of as kind of typical City support

32:10 letters those are the way the rules work now I just want to confirm that that works for all of you in terms of how we deal with them but those can often run through the mayor and the city manager's office um pretty efficiently any questions Michelle um in looking at 8 6.1 the council input portion I'm a little um I guess maybe unclear reading that uh does that put us into any serial communication issues or put any yeah I think I think generally you'd probably be okay because it's not something you're going to deliberate on if it's not if it's just throwing support for something but if it was something you thought you would deliberate on you'd want to be careful about that for sure

33:02 um I might be making this up and maybe this is just like a conversation that I've had just with the mayor but I think maybe we talked about this too I think in terms of the like copying counselors on the proclamations I think it's also helpful um to know um like when the the mayor has taken a stance on something that hasn't necessarily come to the council got it um and I know that that's like the mayor's prerogative and yeah he or she gets to do that however that comes up for me more than there was a proclamation it's more like well I see that Springfield is for X Y or z um so it would be helpful to know as that's happening so it can be like well someone is but maybe not every someone yeah and with copying be sufficient if just on okay all right that sounds great and

33:49 I think to be to kind of extend that logically is when we get into the legislative session there's a lot more content that comes out of you know different committees and and sort of whatnot so I guess just be aware of of that piece is that you know as we're submitting testimony I think that's the that's the place to kind of package it up and put it in a memo or something like that okay all right that's a good point and I shouldn't unell it as just being like the fluffy stuff I know that there's other that's okay I sign a lot of fluffy stuff Corey just to to add to that because I'm thinking about how organized we're getting about our legislative committee and things like that that I think and and not to like I'm not saying you should write a whole new thing and maybe it's a thing we need to talk about in a work session or something um when the mayor mentioned

34:35 you know legislative stuff it's like getting really clear about what our legislative priorities are as a council and that that's where our focus is because I think that sometimes people might be as an as an individual and I'm just maybe for myself that I'm really for a thing um and just getting really clear about what hat they're wearing when they're representing that in front of the legisl because we do have priorities that we are all kind of supporting that makes sense I think that's a good point I think what maybe what I could do as a first step is when the legislative committee kind of re you know for the because it's a big it's a big session too it's going to be a regular session for the next legislative committee there is that subcommittee of the counselors and spend a little time talking about process because the other thing that happens with the legislative

35:21 session as you know time becomes an issue it's like oh we need this now you know and so because we're just not in control of how things will move forward and then that can be tricky for trying to Circle back and let everybody know what we're doing and um so I can I'll put a bug in the legislative AIDS ear and we can talk about that for sure okay I think we're good keep going all right we're almost there I promise okay uh so there's a couple other changes that I am recommending um as I go through these I just try and uh see if I see something that I think you know we should probably um change that um in an effort to sort of modernize these rules so section 3.9 has a has language

36:06 about which is kind of funny now considering how we work things but actually getting information to the media if they requested it you know sort of before we posted it on the website would be like you know we would send it to them weekly and uh kind of have this whole process about public records we have an administrative regulation about public records agendas are posted on the website it really isn't doing anything uh for anybody so I am asking that we would remove that section about agenda and supportive materials to the public um and then the second one is a small change but I think it's important so this talks about how we um adopt ordinances so ordinances are the sort of equivalent of uh a statute at the state level it's your legislative um

36:51 expression of setting policy it's set out in Charter code and the operating policy IES um the operating policies are the least controlling of those three right we always start with the charters like your Constitution the codes like your statutes and the operating policies are like your um administrative regulations or your policies there was one line in there about having and as you know we do ordinances require two readings right so you'll hear Neil do the first reading um at the uh first time we'll talk about it the second reading is often on consent but not always sometimes it could be heard at other times the operating policies have it at the next consecutive meeting but that often is not something that we can do um particularly with planning um and

37:37 annexation ordinances and that kind of thing so I'm asking just for a little flexibility there to give some discretion to the city manager that those can be scheduled kind of at the best time instead of the next consecutive meeting and why that is so important is that if you don't adopt your ordinance correctly it's void and so just think a second of like you know if we don't adopt you know we can you generally fix things but you know if you don't adopt the budget ordinance right or you don't or that's resolution but if you don't adopt an annexation ordinance or a land use decision correctly that can have some real consequences so just trying to clean that up a little bit and that's in your packet as well um and then last slide is really just asking if there's any other topics or direction that you'd like me to um

38:24 look at uh this will come back to you on June 17th for a vote this is something that requires a 2third vote majority because it's your um rules so um we'll do it with a resolution in the vote on the 17th is there anything else that people want to add okay all right all right okay well thank you and uh I'll see you on see you in June perfect thank you that was the last item for the work session so we are going to adjourn until

39:14 7 I'm going to call the regular session of the Springfield City Council into order with a roll call Mayor Vin Gordon here councelor Weber here councelor Mo here councelor rodley here councelor Blackwell here councelor Doyle here and councelor pisher and we are councelor pisher anytime please join me for the Pledge of Allegiance as we begin our meeting tonight there are two designated times for public testimony this evening under

40:01 business from the audience and public hearings if you are attending P iners please complete the request to speak card located at the entrance of 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 either of those times please raise your hand in Zoom the order of public testimony is as follows any per anyone in the council chambers and then anyone who has raised their virtual hand first item please uh mayor for the record councelor pisher has joined virtually uh the first item is Springfield upbeat item number one is mayor's recognition EMS week Proclamation mayor this is your item all right so we've got a couple proclamations this evening um I'm going

40:48 to read them and then we'll have the groups inside to have a picture and I think at the end we will have all all the uh the folks back for one big picture since uh is a thank you to all the different city employees who serve this community the first one I have is Emergency Medical Services week whereas Emergency Medical Services are vital public service and whereas the number of Emergency Medical Service teams are ready to provide life-saving care to those in need 24 hours a day 7 days a week whereas Emergency Medical Services teams consist of First Responders EMTs paramedics emergency medical dispatchers firefighters police officers Educators administrators Hospital nurses emergency nurses em

41:35 emergency physicians train members of the public and other out of Hospital medical service providers and whereas the members of the Emergency Services Medical Teams whether career or volunteer engage in thousands of hours of specialized training and continued education to enhance life saving skills whereas it is appropriate to recognize the value in the accomplishments of emergency medical service providers by designating this week Emergency Medical Services week I Sean Van Gordon mayor of Springfield in recognition of events to proclaimed May 19th through 25th is emergency services uh week this is the 50th anniversary of of the EMS week and it is EMS week honoring our past and forging our future I encourage all

42:21 community members to observe this week with appropriate programs ceremonies and activities

43:27 at follow instructions well all right one two three thank wait reass just got this

44:13 Proclamation whereas Public Works professionals focus on infrastructure facilities and services that are vital importance to the sustainable and resilient communities into the public health high quality of life and well-being of the people of Springfield whereas it is the public interest for its citizens Civic leaders and children in Springfield to gain knowledge of and to maintain an ongoing interest in understanding the importance of Public Works and Public Works programs in their respective Community whereas this year 2024 March this 64th annual National Public Works week sponsored by the American public works Association I Sean Van Gordon to Proclaim May 19th through 25th National Public Works week I urge all citizens to join with representatives of the

44:59 American public works Association and government agencies in activities events ceremonies designed to pay tribute to our Public Works professionals Engineers managers and employees to recognize substantial contributions that they make in protecting our national health safety and quality of life

46:11 three I think I'm going to try one more without the flash that's much better than responsible for that all right this is the last one it's the national law enforcement week Proclamation whereas there are more than 800,000 law enforc officials Ser serving

46:58 in communities across the United States including the dedicated members of Springfield Police Department whereas the first recorded death in 17 since the first recorded death in 1786 more than 23785 law enforcement officers in in the United States have made the ultimate sacrifice and been killed in the line of duty whereas 556 new names of fallen heroes are being added to the national law enforcement memorial this spring including 224 officers killed in 2022 and 332 officers killed the previous year whereas the service and sacrifice of all officers killed in the line of Dy will will be honored during the national law enforcement Memorial's 36th candalite vigil on May 13th

47:44 2024 I Sean Van Gordon mayor of Springfield do hereby Proclaim May 12th through 18th as national law enforcement week in the city of Springfield and publicly salute the service of law enforcement officers in our community and communities Across the Nation

48:33 that nice thank you don't go anywhere all right come on back we're g to do one big one we got to make the pios happy come on follows people come on counselor squish in stand in the back come on over right I guess we don't have go this way so we're more centered

49:18 no we were trying to make a place where Michelle could be seen short one back

50:30 coun bisher in the background yeah you know I saw that okay came appear all right next item please next item is the consent calendar even though it's not on the agenda but I'm gonna go ahead and make a motion to approve the consent calendar second NE can you call the roll please vot please Council rber yes councelor Mo yes Council rodley yes yes councelor Blackwell yes councelor Doyle I and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please next item is public hearings you have two public hearings this evening the first one is amending the Springfield Municipal Code to limit liability for use of public Trails per OS

51:18 10566 this is a first reading no action requested and Christina KZ is here for this item good evening mayor and Council this is a proposed ordinance that would amend the Springfield Municipal Code to add a limitation of liability for the Public's use of trails and accessways essentially walking or biking facilities or equestrian facilities that are um not located on public streets within the City of Springfield this is a statute that's been in place for a number of years but came to our attention after the legis ative session this year and because Springfield is less than 500,000 people we have to affirmatively adopt

52:03 into um this limitation of liability in order for it to take effect so that's what the city attorney's office is recommending in consultation with the risk management um in Human Resources this would apply to any um not only to the city and its employees and officers and agents but also to volunteers who help to maintain public trails that are owned or maintained by the city and um nonprofit organizations associated with those volunteers as well as adjacent land owners who dedicate property for public easements and trails to the extent that they're not profiting or charging uh money for that access um by the public and the purpose of this is really to incentivize people to help us maintain our trails to incentive to

52:48 allow the city to more easily provide those public recreational or access opportunities and to limit liability for basic negligence gross negligence which is essentially acting way outside the bounds of what's considered normal um reasonable care or things that are unusually dangerous and for which their strict viability under the law would not be covered so if somebody was to you sort of intentionally um have misconduct it wouldn't be limited by this ordinance and so I recommend you hold a public hearing just to solicit input from the public um and then this is a first reading so there's no further action tonight are there any questions all right I'm going to go and open the public hearing I don't have any

53:34 cards for this item or is there anybody wanting to testify online it appears there are no hands for this item then I'm going to close the public hearing uh this is first reading only no action tonight next item please next item is liquor license endorsements for the renewal period of 2024 through 2025 Jeff Pascal is here for this item thank you mayor council uh so this is our annual visit regarding um liquor license renewals which will start coming in July 1st to be reissued um something that we have um hold annually um the liquor licenses are governed by section 7.3 through 7.34 of the Springfield Municipal Code which is part of the

54:19 packet and list the criteria one of those criteria is um police activity that sort of thing and so what you can is a list of the 172 um probable or anticipated applications that we'll see and then you know really thank PD because as we can see is is the report that we're getting from PD that listed out is really detailed and easy to read on the activity so um nothing really jumped out calls are slightly down over the last year over the same per time period this last year um and so there's really no reason staff doesn't recommend approval by the council after holding a public hearing are there any questions before I open the public hearing I'm going to open the public hearing I do not have any cards for this

55:06 item is there anybody wishing to testify online appears no hands for this item I'm going to close the public hearing I'd like to make a motion to approve the liquor license renewal list second could you call the Boot please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councel Blackwell yes councel Doyle yes and councelor pisher yes motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please mayor the next item is business from the audience okay um before I call the first card for business of the audience from the audience I do want to I've got some additional um commentary about Finley Heights to add Now's the Time in the

55:51 agenda for the council to hear business from the audience if you've signed up to speak to the council regard regarding the Finley Heights annexation which is on the agenda this evening the public Hearing in this matter has been closed while you may speak to the council at this time the council cannot consider any new information and public comments made this evening in our decision to approve or deny this application unless we also allow the applicant to respond to the new information the council will make its decision based on information that is already in the record which includes all public testimony provided to the city council during the public hearing of April 4th 2024 it's April 4th oh tyo April 1st 2024

56:42 4 I have hold please thank you um if once I call you up please come up state your name and location in the city for the record and then you'll have three minutes Peter defasio you do have to turn it on Peter okay there you go there we go uh thank you mayor council I appreciate the opportunity to speak here tonight uh my wife mnie D and I live at 1083 South 70th Street we've live there for about 35 years um you know annexations can be

57:30 routine and beneficial to the city uh annexations can also be uh very problematic uh in this case we're talking about an area which has been uh declared by the state of Oregon dogami to be geologically unstable and subject to uh landslides and there are many uh evidences of landslides on the property uh also the state published a map which they withdrew because people were very concerned about losing their homeowners insurance uh the map was withdrawn but you can still find a copy of it and this was declared as a very high Hazard of fire risk area and the problem would be for the city to provide the services sub would have to provide services in a geologically unstable area subject to

58:16 water main breakages and disruptions um the current drainage is through just two U two natural drainages into uh one runs through the back of my property into South 70th Street through a very small Culvert on the side of the street the other drains directly down to C 71st which is 12T wide you would be accessing that 12T wide Street up a 16 degree slope with emergency vehicles and then trying to come back down and evacuate people um so you would have problems uh with fire evacuation uh with Emergency Medical Services and uh potentially with public services from the Springfield build utility board just on a personal note uh during the ice storm uh I have a generator and a wood

59:02 stove we stayed until Monday but when all the trees started falling everywhere like the one that took out councelor pich's house we decided it was time to evacuate I called the city and I said uh could you put a little gravel on my street it's a public Street South 70th Street it is gravel but it's covered by an inch and a half of ice and you can't even stand on it and they said no we're sorry we cannot get any any equipment up there so my wife and I evacuated by sliding down the street on our butts with backpacks on uh the dog looked very puzzled as we went down the street and uh you know so to go further up that hill where you already can't provide services I think would be very problematic I realize that you cannot consider new information but in any case I wish to uh give my voice to the

59:48 Council on this matter thank you very much thank you Rona Frank please a thank you okay shall I start yes with your name and location for the record my name is R Frank and I've lived at the top house 71st Street in the thirston hills for the past 24 years I appreciated councelor Michelle Weber wanting to know

1:00:33 what the historical attempts for annexation requests were of the property and why they were not approved my neighbors and I emailed a response to all of you on April the 10th listing those reasons destabilization was then and is now the concern Skyline Estates the first tentative subdivision plan that they submitted in January of 2007 was the only previous request for annexation and it was for the same 7.94 Acres of tax slot 500 that the present owner of Finley Estates applied for that plan plan was deemed incomplete by the City of Springfield due to multiple issues associated with steep slopes lack of consideration for Landslide hazards and legally permitted density and access their second tentative subdivision

1:01:19 application in June of 20 2008 Skyline skylines owner wrote the development plan and lay lay out has changed significantly from the first one therefore we are starting a new with the tentative subdivision application process the city limit boundary divides tax lot 500 and the proposed subdivision will be entirely within the city limits that plan was not approved due to the same issues in the 2007 plan with more concerns about landslides additional traffic transportation and Road issues the third subdivision plan in May of 2009 went through a presubmit review where Public Works stated they couldn't approve the development at the time duee to the lack of any proposed access to two of the Lots with no provision of water engineering cited ongoing concern

1:02:04 of St stability of any structures in an area known to be prone to landslides the owner was provided with a checklist of deficiencies with the design and did not proceed further more recently at the November 8th 2022 development issue meeting for Finley estate's application for a 52 lot subdivision and possible annexation Tom sver City of Springfield planning department stated these following constraints on annexing the plan balance of the property quote due to the Topography of the site obtaining adequate public services will be a challenge without potential destabilization of the site there are steep slopes high susceptibility of landslides across the site tree removal Street and lot grading storm water retention waste water drinking water

1:02:50 infrastructure and underground power could all be contributing factors to destabilization unquote because of the destruction and destabilization from the ice storm and the trees that fell I've not lived in my home since January 14th and can't for for a year the damage to our properties and land on South 70 Street was extensive I also slid down on my butt we are living through the results of destabilization and we urge the council not to approve Finley Height's request for annexation thank you thank you the next person that I have is Katherine

1:03:41 PR is this the bar is is green is active all right I I'm Katherine Fraz and I live at 895 South 71st Street um I've been there for over 37 years and I appreciate this opportunity to speak regarding the annexation of tax slot 500 I am a member of a group of neighbors who advocated for our safety and that of all residents of the thirston hills during the 2007 to 2009 previous failed development attempt prominently displayed on an index card on my home office bulletin board is a quote from a city planner which states safety is a first consideration of Hillside development the dangerous lack of safe road access was a major reason for the lack of City approval of this plan our group our group has a wealth of experience and a mountain of information

1:04:26 and research regarding issues of development on a steep Landslide prone to on a steep Landslide prone Hillside we met in person with a developer will lamain director and City Planning officials we contacted public servants from Springfield Utility Board the state of Oregon and Eugene Springfield Fire Safety we employed legal councel and the services of a private consultant we purchased CDs of development meetings from the city and poured over every detail we we have records of countless email Communications with planning officials detailed maps of the area and development plans and a thorough knowledge of the hillside development overlay of the Springfield development code at the first reading Mark Russ stated we did not update the section of

1:05:11 the code advocacy during these years came at Great personal cost we labored through full-time career serious illness the death of family members and all the challenges of everyday life we respect and support each other because of our experience I feel a strong responsibility to speak for other residents of our thirston Hills neighborhood the taxpaying constituents and their families living in the wellestablished neighborhoods between Main Street and the potential development site deserve to live unthreatened by the dangers posed by heavy equipment and the multitude of vehicles that development would bring there is no safe route hundreds of families would be subjected to countless interruptions and the increased potential of tragic pedestrian vehic vehicle accidents and property damage

1:05:57 annexation opens the door to a development plan a historic well-documented Landslide occurred during Road building for the mountain gate development in February of 2008 Springfield City officials asked four families to evacuate their homes until the hill could be stabilized Springfield has a well-deserved reputation for physical responsibility fiscal responsibility there are numerous examples of prudent Flatline develop flatland development featuring priced homes steep Hillside development is a dangerous and expensive use of taxpayer funds and precious public servant time and resources when other app options are safer and wiser The increased cost of developing a steep Hillside does not address the need for affordable medium

1:06:43 density housing thank you thank you the next person is car Carlin Kart hi I'm carine Kart I live at 846 South 71st Street and we've lived there for about a decade so I'm actually a relative newcomer compared to my neighbors um who are speaking tonight I don't have a lot to add to my previous testimony um but I do appreciate the attention that has been given in review for our previous public commentary with all that my neighbors

1:07:29 have mentioned I don't have a lot to add as I mentioned but other than to further emphasize the virtual impossibility of the future development of this land which therefore makes the denial of this annexation a necessity the council is within its Authority deny to deny as the packet says um several points not meeting Road access due to slope and private property seismic and geological data and the fire Marshall's concerns mentioned in part C finding 22 thank you thank you that is the last card that I have Neil is there anybody online that wants to testify so we have one hand at this time for this item it's Royal morier and Royal you should be able to unmute your

1:08:19 microphone hello we can hear you beautiful uh my name is Royal mortier I'm actually the owner of Finley Heights the old 20 5 acre parcel that we're seeking the annexation on um first I'd like to emphasize that we are seeking annexation of a small segment of a much larger larger area and the annex the seeking of annexation and the possible forthcoming development I believe are two totally separate issues and we should just focus on the annexation um primary items of concern that have been raised by the neighbors um and obviously were're something of our own concern uh with myself being a structural engineer as well is the slope stability however prior to purchasing we

1:09:04 had an extensive and very well done geotechnical report from 2008 done by gunar uh that very easily laid out how to handle this um that did not cons so we mve forward with the purchase um since then we've done additional test pits we've done borings we've installed an inclinometer um and employed Branch engineering for testing and monitoring Services they provided another Geotech report um that Geotech report was sent out to all the counselors this morning um and we we apologize that that was not uh something that was provided previously or requested um and we would

1:09:50 like to have that have this the record open reopened to have that included in here to meet the concerns of item c um in that report it again just like in gunar says yes slope instability is something that occurs in this area frankly it Ur it occurs on any slope throughout all of Oregon and it's something that could be managed it also should be noted that the majority of the 25 acres is not in a landf flow or prior Landslide area however many surrounding properties that are developed or were recently developed are within that same land flow to address some other concerns um we are utilities will be brought in

1:10:35 from above the property we have talked with mam Lane and sub and they will be installing a fire break to alleviate the and reduce the fire risk as what was brought up by Mr defasio and our utilities will be brought in from above and that further limits the risk of any land flow uh in addition we're leaving over 11 acres of the development area open non non- touched this is to provide again lots of vegetation full slope stability and and prevent any future things uh Road layouts are also being done to limit soil cut but again this is all pertaining to the development this is just the annexation and we would like this addressed and and approved thank

1:11:22 you and roal before you go could you state state your location for the record could it be your address or the city you're from um yeah I I live in Gul Breeze Florida okay thank you thank you I Neil is there anybody else online that wants to testify yes mayor uh we have a hand for Cecilia tomal and Cecilia you should be able to unmute your microphone good evening councilman members I would like to um ask if you could hear can you hear me all right we can hear you can you state your name and uh location for the record yes I'm Cecilia toll and I'm a

1:12:09 land owner near the intersection of South 72nd Street and Holly and I'd like to remind the council members that um you were just addressed by Mr mortier he may have said that things can be stabilized and that um being included in bring bringing everything into annexation are two things that are separate but there are some aspects that are incorrect about that for one thing we all I know because I was the person that did the land use of our property five acres that were subdivided at my location into two Housing Development spots um and it was purely that we

1:12:55 annexed our building sites into the city for annexation so that we could have a building plot so the fact that we really cannot separate annexation from the idea that there will be the next thing is a building plan we've heard from all kinds of people saying all the dangers of extra extra traffic that the infrastructure of the roads will not support it emergency vehicles and in our previous state stat ments about water runoff which is very dangerous for the surrounding areas and even more lurking is the idea of the soil there are landslides in these Hills one that I have personally experienced on our land even though we had Branch

1:13:42 engineering do our engineering out of great due diligence and we could not get soil borings deep enough to show us that we actually built on fill land that was from a previous slide there these things are rot with high potential for problems and I am speaking from experience we should not consider this annexation or go or or go forward from there and I would remind the c c city council members that this engineer tried to talk down to you to say that we should just take the average slope which is laughable in mathematical terms so please remember that this person might call us the

1:14:27 neighbors uh in a way that is really looking down on us but we are um we are experienced people living in these areas living in Springfield thank you thank you all right before we move to the next item I just I want to note for people who are tracking this the Finley Heights is not going to come up for about I don't know four or five more items down the road so we'll get to it it's just not immediately next next item please uh next item is resolutions resolution number one is a resolution of necessity Jasper trunk sanitary sewer extension phase three that's p210 65

1:15:14 Jesse Jones is here for this item good evening mayor and counselors uh tonight we're seeking your approval of a resolution of necessity for the Jasper trunk sanitary project um yeah can we pull up the diagram please uh this is a trunk sewer extension in southeast Springfield um it goes along Jasper road and it uh this next phase of the project goes from Mount Vernon uh roughly Mount Vernon out to the intersection of Brands Road and bobst Parkway uh it crosses five uh private property parcels and um the council had previously approved a resolution of necessity that allowed us to go negotiate easements across those Parcels we've successfully negotiated with five four of the five Property Owners to get

1:16:00 the uh easements that we need um we are currently uh been negotiating with the fifth property owner and we are at an impass uh after working for a year on this and we have worked with outside legal counsel to um to help move the negotiations forward and they have recommended that we get a new resolution of necessity for this uh parcel and that has the specific easement boundaries and square footages as shown in the documents um so tonight we're seeking um that approval of that new resolution of necessity and I'd be happy to answer questions are there any questions all right like to make a motion to adopt

1:16:46 resolution number one a resolution exercising the power of eminent domain and authorizing a resolution pursuant to ORS 223 005 and ORS 22315 and ORS 35.6 through 625 concerning acquisition of easements and or RightWay necess necessary for the J Jasper Trump sanitary sewer extension phase three project p210 65 second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor yes counc Doyle no and Council pisher yes motion passes five yeses one no next

1:17:32 item please resolution two is federal aid projects IGA amendments delegation and Amanda Clinton is here for this item good evening mayor and Council I'm Amanda Clinton I'm the senior contracts analyst with development and Public Works um under the direction of Christy Krueger um christe's responsible for the ODOT certification program for the city um I'm here for two reasons tonight as you may be aware Capital engineering has completed the federal certification process in order to deliver Our Own federal aid projects as a certified agency as part of this program there are multiple intergovernmental agreements between the city and the state uh the first IG is what I call the umbrella IGA which is an overall IGA between the city

1:18:18 and the state which outlines uh the guidelines set forth by the certification program which is referenced and attached 3 uh this IG is a 20-year agreement um then there are supplemental agreements uh which are agreements for each Federal project under the certification program uh examples examples of the federal a projects uh are M Street uh Franklin Boulevard Phase 1 Franklin Boulevard Phase 2 and each project has their own agreements um as well as igas within each projects such as igas for design right of way um and constru ction engineering we're asking the council to adopt the resolution authorizing the city manager to execute first our local agency certification program agreement the umbrella agreement

1:19:04 I spoke about um and this agreement has been reviewed and stamped by our assistant City attorney and is now ready to be executed on Council Direction secondly we're asking for ongoing delegation of Authority for the city manager to be able to sign OD do project igas and amendments over a 100,000 uh these include all federal aid certification Statewide Transportation Improvement program projects we call them STI um which are inter Capital Improvement program budget which was approved by Council in January of this year the reason we're requesting delegation of authorities because Springfield Municipal Code States we need Council approval for any IGA and amendments over 100,000 this often can push our project timelines out

1:19:49 extensively delaying our projects um this delegation of authority would allow our team and ODOT to limit risk increase project timelines save a lot of Staff time and keep Public Service uninterrupted we're asking the council to authorize a city manager to be able to execute these federal aid projects without having to seek Council approval every time authorization is needed however all agreements would still be reviewed and approved by the city attorney's office and Council would still approve all construction contracts we're asking for delegation of authority through the current 2024 2027 STI cycle and we will come back to council to request delegation of authority again for following stti Cycles are there any

1:20:37 questions okay before I turn it over to councelor pisher um I think this is a really big deal for us uh if the public is following you know how long Mill Street is taken this has been a contributing factor is the ability for the city to actually deliver um these types of projects so thank you for doing the work I really appreciate it it kind of moves everything from from an infrastructure perspective and just a little bit further ahead Joe yes thank you and I happily make a motion to adopt resolution number two a resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a local agency certification program agreement with ODOT and delegating authority to the city manager to execute supplemental project authorizations for federal aid projects adopted into the Statewide Transportation Improvement program

1:21:22 otherwise known as stip for the funding period ending September 30th 2027 second is there any discussion to the motion councelor Weber yes thank you mayor I just have a question um regarding the scope of work how were these projects determined I'm looking specifically at Fifth Street and I drive that road every day and it's it feels a little tight to me but I'm not a an expert in that Arena so I'm just curious why we've chosen that as a project fif stre is not a part of the federal funding so that would be a separate project so these particular projects that we're asking for

1:22:08 delegation of authority are only federal aid projects so that's a part of the overall stip program which then we also vote on the council and Mayors vote on that um regarding our budget our capital budget so anything that's in the stip is in our capital budget Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councel rodley yes councel Blackwell yes councelor Doyle yes and councel pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please next item is any business from the city council Cory did you even look before you said that it's my peripheral vision I saw your hand up I always have business um first

1:22:55 I have two things one um I normally wear my Public Works hat when we do public works but I couldn't pick a favorite tonight because all three were fantastic and nobody else has given me a hat just um to the Chiefs I don't have a hat either of those so I did not so I don't want my Public Works friends to think that I was sliding them um because as you know I love Public Works you're my people um second uh tomorrow is the last day to vote it is the primary so please if you have not got your fabulous um uh mail ballots in you have until 8 to get them into a box and we have one right downstairs here at City Hall and you can also mail them and they as long as they're postmarked by tomorrow they will still count thank

1:23:42 youbody else all right I had one quick uh announcement so um Memorial Day is coming up and on May on May 27th and it will be in the Springfield uh Veterans Plaza so I'm inviting folks to join us along with our partner mamain in the American Legion Post 40 in honoring and remembering Airman Trinity Reinhardt of Springfield at 10: a.m. on Memorial Day May 27th at our Veterans Plaza the event's going to start at 10: a.m. with an F-15 flyover community members are invited to attend and help in honoring and remembering Aon Reinhardt uh and there will be seating available Refreshments afterwards thank

1:24:27 you next item please next item is uh business from the city manager item number one is Glennwood land use application initiation Ali camp and Mark Rust are here for this item good evening mayor and city council I'm here with Mark Rust planning manager um Ali Camp economic Dev manager um we are here today with a packet of land use applications from an applicant and land owner in the Glenwood area this item was first brought to you in October for a work session to discuss council's interest in supporting a request from the land owner and their tenant atore pipes um atcore and its property owner

1:25:13 wish to use a piece of adjacent land for storage um and right now they are outg growing their current business space the piece of land is currently con constrained by two rail Spurs and it is zoned employment mixed use um because of this constraint it's really challenging to achieve the goals of employment mixed use which is to add employment through offices or headquarters facilities um so the property owner and tenant have proposed uh resoning the property or moving it through a plan change in zone Amendment so that they can use it for a different purpose to support the business uh in October Council indicated initial support for a hybrid approach where the applicant prepares the materials and you all could consider initiating the application so we are back with prepared materials for your

1:25:59 consideration Mark is here for any technical questions that may come up too are there any questions okay I'd like to make a motion to initiate the applicants type for metro plan Amendment and type three zoning map Amendment for 2.9 Acres of real property located on Newman Street at tax map 18- 03- 03-14 tax slot 200 second Neil can you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell yes councel Doyle hi and councel pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS

1:26:47 next item please uh next item is Property Management contract and Ali Camp is here for this item as well um hi mayor and Council in your packet today you have a draft contract for your consideration for Commercial Property Management Services with Campell commercial real estate um before I get into any more explanation I just want to note that we have two representatives from Campbell commercial here today Patrick and Tim um if questions arise um uh the contract in front of you is for a little over three fiscal years um and it comes to a to toal of $235,400 um that cost is broken down over the three plus years in section 15 in

1:27:33 attachment one in front of you um we propose this to be a shared contract between the City of Springfield and the Springfield Economic Development agency which would fall under the two organizations Cooperative Services agreement uh this contract was Soul sourced after an unsuccessful RFP back in September for Commercial Property Management Services uh the service was solicited to bring in appropriate expertise open up staff capacity and add process to our leasing efforts with all of our owned property Campbell commercial has been utilized by partners and in Lane County and staff met with them to vet them over multiple meetings to assure responsibility responsiveness and suitability for the job um I can go into a little bit more

1:28:20 about the resolution just briefly a resolution was included in your packet too which references leasing um kind of direction for booth Kelly uh that resolution includes a draft lease uh should the contract with Campbell move forward we anticipate them continuing to use that draft lease any Corey so I know that and this was going to be a question and then you just you pointed it out this is going to be shared between the city and Springfield Economic Development agency is this same exact thing going to then come in front of the ca board um from my understanding and I'll look to Christina our Cooperative Services agreement allows us to approve a contract by the council and it can

1:29:05 still be used by Ceda so no separate approvals needed okay thank you just a quick question and I don't want to seem bad but if we're talking about a three-year contract and what if after a year or two we're not happy with the service are we locked into that 36 months um there are termination Lang there is termination language in the contract okay yes thank you yes all right I I think we're ready for you all right I'd like to make a motion to direct the city manager to enter into an agreement substantially in the form provided with Campbell commercial real estate for Commercial Property Management

1:29:50 Services second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell yes councelor Doyle hi and councel pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please next item is the annexation of territory to the City of Springfield Annex 7 Acres of vacant residential property located at map 18- 02- 02- 0000 a portion of tax slot 00500 Tom sers is here for this item all right um I've got some additional instructions before the staff report now as the time in the agenda for the council to conduct a second reading on the proposed Annex to of approximately 7

1:30:37 Acres of property in the vicinity of South 71st and sou 72nd known as Finley Heights the council conducted a public hearing on this matter on April April 1st 20124 and the hearing was closed at that time because this is a land use application the council needs to disclose expart contacts with any of the parties an expart contact is a discussion of the application with any parties outside of the public hearing and written record of public comments if any counselors have had such contacts please disclose the substance of that contact so that we can allow the applicant to respond I'm just trying to clarify what that means can you help me with that yes so if Council has spoken to to any

1:31:24 neighbors um since the public hearing or before the public hearing and those and that didn't get disclosed during the April 1 public hearing or if you've spoken with the applicant directly for example um since the public hearing and that wasn't or in a way that wasn't disclosed at time of the public hearing then the substance of that conversation needs to be disclosed so that we can determine if it's information that's not in the record that might bear on your decision or if it's information that's already in the record okay so any any com contact you've had since April 1st or before that if you had contact that you didn't disclose or reference in your deliberations at the April 1 meeting okay because I was doing research today and I did reach out to the applicant and ask some questions so I just wanted to make sure that that was it's not I just

1:32:09 wanted clarification questions um are is it clarification of information in the record yes is it clarification that's not addressed in the supplemental staff report or other findings it is addressed in the supplemental findings then then that's um I think no further responses okay thank you it's in the record explicit responses from everybody that they have had no other contacts that's my recommendation is to just do it by by word okay councelor Weber no councelor mo no councelor rodley no expart contacts councelor Blackwell no all we've heard from Council Doyle already so counciler I have had some exp parte contact with some of the uh res actually

1:32:55 one of the residents in the area but nothing in our conversation was in addition to what was not already disclosed in previous jings and I've had no expart contact so the second uh uh point that we need to kind of talk through and I may need some help here is um really the there are two options right one of them is for us to try to include testimony we've heard tonight and give the applicant a chance to respond one of them is to exclude it now we had the applicant it sounds like come in the middle and sort of respond to the first half of the public and then we had one person out of the after that so somehow we've managed to end up in you know option

1:33:40 three yeah mayor my recommendation um so I kept track during the public comments of um what I believe to be new information that wasn't necessarily in the record the applicant did have a resp a chance to respond to all of those comments or and did so um specifically reference to uh high-hazard fire risk area mapping um uh risks associated with heavy vehicle traffic that might be different than the slope issue um and mountain gate Landslide stability um related issues which are not relevant because they're actually not approximate to the location the applicant had a chance to respond to all of that so I believe that's not an issue the only other comment I heard that was not selcted in the record I believe is not relevant to criteria of

1:34:26 approval and the council can just explicitly decide to disregard that which was the comment from Miss Tom call that Branch engineering did there as in the Tom Call's geotechnical report and um was not able to get deep enough to show the the depth of the landslide that information is not directly relevant I think to your decision tonight and also there's similar information from so from soil test pits and what the applicant provided this morning um so it's consistent with information that's already in the record but also not necessarily relevant so I think you could exclude that evidence that piece of evidence that was new only otherwise everything else was either addressed or is information already in the record do we have to take explicit action to include it in the record or you as the presider um should make that statement

1:35:11 um but it doesn't need a vote by Council okay and um and the other question I had was the applicant asked that we consider the engineering study that they submitted this morning need to do anything with that um I recommend that you do include that in the record and we've prepared supplemental findings that were distributed and are also posted on the city's website this afternoon um in response to that report that report was also in response to comments submitted by the public on April 10th which was also after the hearing was closed those comments are addressed in the staff report and so for that reason um I recommend that you just include both both pieces of information I will note that the applicant submitt um this morning does not change the staff recommendation and that's discussed in those supplemental findings and I know Tom will go into that as well

1:35:57 okay before we get to the staff report I want to note that we're explicitly including um testimony that we've heard from the public uh from the public today including the um response from the applicant as well as including the report that they submitted this morning ver by email of of additional findings um I will note that we're also excluding um the last public uh Citi that Testify the Tom call testimony um from consideration this evening so before we hear the staff report I would like to explain the options for the city council to move forward on this application as we will hear from the planning staff the

1:36:43 findings and the staff report have been updated and the staff now recommend that we do not approve the ordinance tonight here are our options first we could approve the ordinance tonight after the second reading if we do that the council will need to adopt different findings that than what is included in the staff report to show the criteria of the approval are approval are met second we could deny the annexation application based on the current staff report and findings if we vote to deny the application then we will adopt the proposed then we will not adopt the proposed ordinance and the denial will be the city's final decision last we could take no action tonight and allow the applicant to submit more information to the city to show that the criteria of approval are met and allow

1:37:29 the staff to renegotiate the annexation agreement this would require us to reopen the public hearing and conduct a third reading of the ordinance this fall now it's Tom sers who will provide the staff report and then the council will conduct our deliberations good evening mayor and City councilors I'm Tom sver senior planner with the current planning section we are here tonight for the second reading of an ordinance to Annex an approximately 7 acre vacant piece of property located on

1:38:15 South 71st Street in South Eastern Springfield you'll be hearing about the updated information in the staff report that has led staff to a new conclusion the AIS packet also contained a briefing memo with responses to the questions presented by counselors on April 1st as you may recall the proposed annexation area is outlined in red and comprises only a portion of tax slot 500 which is outlined in yellow the other portion is already inside the city limits there are four criteria of approval for annexations in the Springfield development code which were discussed in full during the first reading staff updated the findings based on testimony and further Evidence which affected the conforming statuses of

1:39:00 Criterion C and Criterion D the conformance of Criterion a remains unchanged the conformance of Criterion B remains unchanged but staff did provide an additional finding to note that the overall Development Area is considered as being not serviceable in the city's residential lands housing needs analysis the analysis concludes that slopes above 25% are considered undevelopable or unserviceable and most of the property in that analysis was mapped that way Criterion C was affected for the following reasons upon further analysis of this Criterion goal s natural hazards policy C32 of the metro plan details that local governments shall require sight specific

1:39:46 soil surveys and geologic studies where potential problems exist given the the deg ree to which the site is encumbered by steep slopes and oami mapping of landslide risks it would be prudent for the applicant to include analysis of the safe de safe developability of the site at the annexation stage rather than deferring it to a future development application the annexation application did not include site specific geologic studies or grading plans showing that property can be safely developed in the leadup to this meeting the applicant stated that they have completed Ed a geotechnical study and prepared a tentative plat showing the extent of grading the applicant provided a geotechnical report and conceptual water

1:40:32 supply plan this morning which was briefly analyzed no further grading information has been provided during the completeness check meeting held on December 15 2023 the fire Marshall's office stated that they would need to have an infrastructure plan for water supply and Safe physical access before support in the annexation staff supported this by asking for a grading or utility plan that would prove access feasibility however it is not a required component of an annexation submittal the applicant ultimately did not provide any such plans with the annexation submitt up to this point the evidence in the record indicates that the property likely cannot be served by streets

1:41:17 meeting the city's standards for the following reasons per stdc 3 3525 no new driveways or intersections are allowed where Street slopes exceed 12% no Street can exceed 15% for more than 200 ft and no Street May exceed 18% for any distance at all the slope of South 71st Street fronting the property appears to exceed the maximum 12% allowed for any new intersections it does not appear to be possible to extend new streets from South 71st Street to the subject property consistent with the hillside development overlay standards without significant regrading to current streets the tentative subdivision plan

1:42:02 provided for the 2022 dim shows segments of streets through the adjoining properties needed to reach the annex property in areas that would exceed the maximum Street grades in SDC 3.3.5 25 unless there was significant regrading of Hillside based on the city's topographic maps thus to show the property could be served by a transportation Network in an orderly and efficient manner there needs to be some information about geologic stability of the site and the feasibility of massive regrading of the street network uh I'm going to jump ahead for one of my slides here as previously stated the applicant recently provided a geotechnical report prepared by Branch engineering this

1:42:48 report largely focused on the western part of the overall site that is currently within the city limits Branch noted that they were not able to access the majority of the eastern part of the site the information in the report states that further investigation is needed and that the Zone C or Phase 2 area that being highlighted in red um the annexation area that is is a former Landslide and potentially unstable therefore at this time the evidence in the rec record does not show that the minimum level of key Urban facilities and services can be provided in an orderly and efficient

1:43:36 manner the conformance of Criterion D was affected for the following reason specific fiscal impacts to the city will depend on the feasibility of extending the public transportation Network to serve the site with public roads and cannot be determined based on the evidence in the record as cited under Criterion C therefore the proposed annexation agreement is not adequate to mitigate fiscal impacts of the city because the extent of those impacts are currently unknown during the public hearing on April 1st public comment Drew attention to the dogami mapping of the area this map shows the susceptibility of shallow landslides those occurring less than 15 ft below the ground surface moderate is in Orange and high susceptibility is in

1:44:22 red this map the susceptibility of deep landslides those occurring Beyond 15 ft deep again the Orange shows moderate and red represents High susceptibility lastly this exhibit was provided by the applicant to show the new subdivision layout with topographic lines this does not show the extent of needed cut or grading on the site it does show that the extent of the test pits for the analysis the Geotech analysis were focused on the western side of the lot as opposed to the Eastern side which is labeled as Landslide area because the new findings do not satisfy all criteria of approval council is within its authority to deny the

1:45:08 proposed annexation thank you councilors and mayor and I'm here for any questions you may have now is the time for the city council to to deliberate on the annexation application as a reminder we can vote to adopt the ordinance which will require us to change the findings we can vote to deny the application or we can vote to reopen the hearing in the fall and allow the applicant to submit more information and renegotiate the annexation agreement are there any questions for Tom before we really dive into deliberations yeah so I had just have a questions about this because um I went tried to do

1:45:53 a deep dive on this and I and this morning but on April 1st when we had the first reading and the public hearing at that time the recommendation was that the app complied with standards and provisions of the city code and state statutes and then it was after that that you received we received public testimony and what have you so I'm trying to understand the timeline mainly because you know I work in public works as well and I'm not used to having us jump straight from hey it seems like we're complying to a denial and so you know my tendency is to say why aren't we going with the um the opportunity for the applicant to address like we need the grading we need these different things and so I'm trying to find out what happened between April 1st or April 10th did you go to the applicant and say

1:46:39 these are the concerns we have you need to provide us with a geoe report that has this grading that has and give them the specific things that we're going to potentially cause a denial so that they knew that you're on you know we're looking at denying this if you don't provide us this stuff that's what I'm trying to figure out so sure uh between the first hearing and now let's say or from April 10th until now um staff was not aware of the status of any further plans that the applicant may have had or put together um it does take some considerable amount of time to create a geotechnical report and if that was something I believe um Mr morier did say that he had that prepared uh at which point um especially that it

1:47:27 is not typically a requirement of an annexation approval uh it could have been submitted along with the other materials in the annexation application uh especially at the point of the completeness check meeting when fire expressed their concern for access to the site um so if that report had been prepared up to that point and staff was aware of that then we could have asked for it at that time ever we did ask for an infrastructure plan or something else that would have shown uh the feasibility or any other developability um criteria or details that would have helped us come to a more supportable conclusion um so with that lack of information and based on what is in the record at least up to that point of the

1:48:13 first hearing that's what staff had to go based off of um the burden of proof is on the applicant and especially after that completeness check meeting where we expressed Our concern and even originally the uh November 2022 dim on the topic where we did Express concern about the uh Landslide susceptibility very high risk and stuff like that if this information was available to us I wish it had been supplied to us okay thank you Christina yeah I also want to clarify that the decision whether or not to extend the public hearing and accept more information is the council's decision so it would have been inappropriate for staff to contact the applicant and urge them to um submit

1:48:58 additional information um they certainly have the right to as you've seen they've submitted that information they have the right to do that I do know that staff provided the public comments that were submitted in writing um right after the hearing and then obviously we're in attendance of the public hearing that you had so just want to clarify that it is the council's decision tonight um what you want to do in terms of the record and the hearing from this point forward I do I do understand that but I also would think that if if staff's intent is to deny an application that we would then make the um applicant aware of that it just seems like that it changed after we got a lot of public and I'm not for I'm just saying that for due diligence and for due process that to just jump from this first reading straight to denial just

1:49:43 seemed I mean it's just not a process I'm used to seeing so uh Nancy I think we can all agree that this has been um a complicated matter um in terms of public administration you know staff is our job is to bring forward uh facts as we know them at the time and uh we bring the strongest recommendation that we can at the time when we know it there are also legal processes that that come on the legislative part of public process that are under the purview of the legislative body the elected officials um and so uh this is why we have uh public meetings so so that this type of discussion and deliberation can occur in the public so that the public is aware

1:50:28 of um all of the information that we have at the time and that is why we're going through this process tonight so I actually am appreciative that um we're having this uh public deliberation because it shows that you as a council are very uh diligent in your work and um that this uh matter has been thoroughly vetted um in at the initial point when um when we received materials and then upon additional uh information during a public process so again when we have a public hearing we're really tight and we want to make sure that we do everything within the public process I appreciate that thank you I guess my last point would be that if if

1:51:13 we land on denial tonight then that applicant is given a list of the reasoning why which kind of sounds like we already have and then that person that applicant has the opportunity to reapply with the um information that you're requesting and try again is that correct yes that's correct thank you one clarification on that I I believe we may have a one-year um requirement to wait in between similar applications no we don't we no longer have that requirement only for plan amendments okay thanks Mark all right anybody else we can start deliberations if people have comments they want to make St someday something will happen up there City's growing we need that but

1:52:00 right now this application doesn't answer all the questions that we need to have answered before I I will approve it I will go for it so Cory thank you councelor Mo for kicking us off um I want to say that I appreciate the time that we have taken to dig into this and know that it's been um and I know that I sometimes am a little colloquial know that it's been a little bit Wiggly um and I just I went out there this afternoon because in addition to like reading all of this and I just wanted to go out there and just really sort of absorb it and I just happened to be there when the school bus was there letting all of these children off to head off into their their homes and their houses and I think for me that

1:52:45 just really drove home the the ecological considerations of this that there there are there are families that are living there and um there is you know the the consideration for landsides I think is something that we cannot ignore and then we just layer into that the concerns about are we going to be able to get services to these folks and as y'all know like I am super pro housing I want all the housing in all the places and I do not think that this is a place at this time that we should be putting houses in so I will be um voting against it sh um first I want to thank all of the folks that that came and gave us public testimony provided all the history um helping us understand that there were

1:53:30 some issues up there that we uh may not have been aware of when we initially had this conversation so thank you very much for that um after Wayne all of those comments applicant response and all of the documentation that we've read through I I'm not supportive of this annexation at this time anybody else Victoria I too am not supportive of approving the annexation um I do like the idea of option three which is to bump it to the fall give PE reopen the um public hearing and allow for the applicant to provide the information but I will go with whatever the um the majority of the the council goes with and I I know how the public feels

1:54:17 so I was kind of leaning towards that as that as well just reopening it and letting someone that's applying for this to bring a little more information back before just giving a denial of course I'm you know for housing and for development on all levels um so that's I'm struggling with this one um but after you know hearing public comment I I lived up in mountain gate when the slide happened up there I know that that's a scary thing we don't want to add housing that could possibly neg negatively affect other housing of course um there's a lot of uh items that were brought up tonight that you know make this sound like not the best idea so um you know I'm I'm a little torn but I'm if everyone's about you know denial

1:55:02 at least that answer my question that they could come back in a year and reapply get their ducks in a row then I could possibly go with that as well but I'm not for passing it at this time Joe thank you very much um I like how you use the term ducts because I'm one of those things I'm just thinking about this and it's like well if it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck it's duck in the sense of the topography and the geography has not changed it's been uh looked at it's been denied for been as far as not feasible but I got I I side with Victoria in the sense that it's like okay there's no I mean we're not even if we say no which is where I'm leaning is does not mean no forever and it's not even a year from now they can apply next

1:55:49 week and and Supply more information but based on the information that's been provided by staff and all the written comments and the verbal comments from that is that um I can't support this moving forward and until they come back to us with a new application so I'm ready to make a motion whenever you are mayor uh yeah I want to make a couple of comments um I think we're all struggling with this one this one's this council is a particularly pro-development Council and wants to see both housing and economic development through this City and when I really stepped back and I just read the material and thought about what was actually going on it's clear that this application we should we should deny this application um it's just not

1:56:35 there's too many questions from the slope Mater you know all the information around slopes to when you read the analysis around you know Emergency Services it's not clear we can serve this area at all and frankly right at the core at the core Port part of it it's the roads and the infrastructure like that that road is pretty remote and the idea that we're going to put more Folks up there and get more services up there just doesn't seem plausible I don't see a way in good conscience that we could serve this area at this point yes Joe thank you Mar and and you mentioned something that that I forgot to mention too is that they're talking about 70th Street and 70th Street I encourage anybody to go up there and look at it's nothing more than a paved

1:57:20 Logging Road it's extremely narrow it can be extremely dangerous and I cannot see being part of my name on some part of some paper somewhere that says yes build up there and have a lot of of loss of property Andor subject people some pretty significant uh dangers so I'm ready to make a motion if that's okay with you mayor when I'd like to make a um make a motion to deny application 81124 d00 004 type typ or type 4 annexing certain ter territory map 18-2 two- z00 portion of tax lot 00500 to the City of Springfield based

1:58:06 on the staff report and findings in the agenda packet as attachment to exhibit D with the supplemental findings dated May 20 second and Christina before we call the vote can you just clarify for everybody a vote vote of yes is denying the application correct a vote of yes would deny the application the the final decision would be reduced to writing in the form of a notice of decision with the staff report and findings um attached to that that would get then get mailed off and would likely ask the mayor to sign that notice of decision on behalf of the council all right great thank you uh Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor

1:58:51 Blackwell councelor Doyle hi and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please any other business from the city manager a few items uh one I wanted to uh uh express my appreciation to the uh city council and also to the community members that came here to testify tonight I know it's not easy to come and speak to your government and you all did exceptionally well um I know representative basio has a little bit of experience so I don't count him however all of you came in in your three minute allotted time and very concisely and that was a master class in how to give uh excellent public testimony um also I just wanted to say you know oddly this is my favorite part of the job and that

1:59:37 is because I um passionately believe in our go our government and the government's job is to hear from its community and its constituents and I'm very proud that in our nation and in our city we are not afraid to have difficult conversations and to have them respectfully and have them informed by data and reason um so I just wanted to say that uh also this past Saturday we had our spring cleanup that was a lot of fun to go to um thank you for everybody who came out and dropped their stuff off and also to everybody who volunteered it was a great time um finally I wanted to acknowledge and um very important um accreditation um by our Police Department from the northwest

2:00:22 accreditation Alliance um our Police Department after uh long uh and and intensive work uh received this accreditation and to me this is yet another step of how they are showing uh how they're um their transparency their accountability their professionalism and their dedication and uh Chief sh and deputy chief R are um excellent leaders in this organization they're committed to having a learning organization and I and incredbly proud of them um that's all I have thank you any business from the city attorney no business we are Jour have a good night everybody