Springfield City Council — June 17, 2024

0:04 I'm going to call the Springfield City Council work session to order with a 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 thank you we have two work session items tonight the first one's the land acquisition for affordable housing update with Katie and Aaron all right um good evening mayor and Council Katie Carol housing analyst for the city joined by Erin ffield Our Community Development analyst um so tonight just wanted to give you a little update on the city's land acquisition

0:51 efforts um as you're all aware Council directed staff to look for land to buy to be developed with um income qualified housing to ser ve household with low incomes so far the city has acquired three properties um using mostly onetime arpa funds that the city received through an IGA with Lane County originally received 1.5 million about 900,000 of that is remaining um we'll be back to you on July 1st for your consideration of a program to authorize sorry for your consideration to authorize a program um for land acquisition that would allow us to to um help developers apply for those funds as forgivable loans to acquire land for that purpose also um but

1:38 tonight we're focusing on the three city-owned properties wanted to give you some updates on them um we're in the process of getting Landscaping Maintenance put together for all three especially given that we've been getting a lot of rain um and then as we mentioned the packet we also have a web page setup now that talks about the city's General land acquisition efforts for housing and also all the city-owned properties so I'm going to talk about the two properties that the city acquired from Lane County and then Erin will talk about the third one um so as you'll recall we took over ownership of two properties that the county had taxed for closed on for the purposes of developing affordable housing so the first one at Laura Street um the council directed staff to Award with home ARP funds so

2:25 that'll be for affordable rental housing um that RFP is going to open soon hopefully in the next month it's being um run by the City of Eugene on behalf of the Springfield Eugene home Consortium um and then that will close in the late fall also about that property we had a neighborhood meeting back in April um to let people know when that the city owned the property um what the general plans are and kind of next steps and um we're planning on having another meeting with neighbors and um interested developers once that R RFP goes out and we get an idea of who's interested in responding to it um and then finally we have an email list where neighbors or other

3:11 interested folks can sign up to get big updates on that property so then moving to South 52nd which is the other tax for closed property that the city took over oh sorry was there a question oh sorry I just thought councelor pish raised his hand but sorry Joel you waiting or you have a question now yeah I mean you can finish up on the 52nd Street and probably after that is time for questions right sure okay yeah sorry um so the South 52nd property uh which is the other one we took over from the county as a tax forclosed property um Council directed staff to make that one available for home ownership um the city doesn't have any construction funding available to

3:57 pair with that property so it's kind of Fallen to to the bottom of those three priorities just given that the other two um are attached to existing RFP processes potentially which Aon will get into um and what else do I to say about that one um the city does however have the Springfield home ownership program or the shop program um that could be utilized to lower the cost for a home buyer at those um houses once they're created as well as the SDC program for home ownership which the council is currently authorized through December of 2025 so those are both resources that someone could potentially access to make home ownership possible there it sounds like maybe we have a question from councelor pisher before we move to the next

4:43 one good Joe yes thank you Sean our mayor um couple questions that come to mind as you speaking you are talking about the lower income or the income income qualified Etc so I don't see any in this documentation of what that the definition of that and what the am M Ami is of that definition and I have been seeing documentation recently in some transactions at the city has been looking at that are mentioning 80% of the Ami and some at 60 and it it appears as though that is a self-imposed percentage or is there a state requirement that must have that certain percentage level and then secondly uh

5:29 I'm concern when you indicated that to have that arpa money available Etc to to start a program to which to administer etc etc but it was my understanding that you cannot use arpa funds for programs or at least that's something where we don't want to get involved in creating a program that has cost into perpetuity with using ARP as sort of a seed money for a pro for a project which we don't have to be able to continue so I'm concerned about those two points all right so um getting to the first question so um Christina's here so maybe she can jump in if I'm wrong but I believe for the tax for closed properties that to take those over from the county it has to be for a public

6:14 purpose there are several listed one of them is for lowincome housing um which is defined at the 80% Ami level now when you talk about the 60% Ami level some of that has to do with other funding so for the Lura Street property the home ARP funding that would be paired with that is limited to the 60% Ami so that's why it would be 60% Ami for that property and then for the 16th and Main property that eron's going to talk about um we used those County that $1.5 million onetime funding from the county and one of the requirements of that was that that be for lowincome housing also again

7:01 80% Ami um did you have anything to add to that one eron before I move to the next question I was just going to add um we have yeah to the question about the who decides the Ami we have been looking at either where are we getting the land or in this case what funding is being used um I think a question we did bring to council which you gave input on during our last work session was for um the land acquisition of sort of making this additional arpa money available um it's sort of an interesting it's a good reminder counselor of saying you're right we can't just create a new program that won't be funded afterwards and so the attempt being to um not create a program per se but to make um the funding available until it runs out and it's not available for operating costs

7:47 it's only available for the cost of purchasing land and so quote unquote that's the program is to say we have land available that developers can apply for or we have thank you we have funds available that Developers can apply for in order to purchase land and once that is done there's the program is done so a limited time in that sense um but your input and saying um I think it was 51% of making sure all um units or at least 51% of them are uh low income um we sort of had the could have been more um could not have been less based on the source of funding but um you wanted to make sure it was at that 51% so um you'll see that um on the July 1 date when we bring it back to you but we're sort of so many

8:33 different funding streams or sort of opportunities and trying to braid them in away is where those percentages com from I appreciate that I'm just trying to keep squ away in my head too it's okay thank you very much all right any other questions all right let's keep going on to the 16th Street one great so 16th uh and Main I'll just note to the two Lane County foreclosed properties are smaller they're each less than an acre they're less than half an acre Lura Street we're imagining four units 52nd Street we're imagining maybe five up to six um when we get to 16th in Maine um now we're talking about apartment style um given the zoning and the site it's 1.1 acres and so just a little different magnitude

9:18 and sort of um how we would think how would we help create a successful program and so when we look at 16th in Maine we used arpa funds to purchase that from the county um there is the requirement um that those funds be um that that property be lowincome um but in order to fund an apartment style complex like given our experience um it's going to need significant subsidy so when we think about uh 16th and Q Street and the Cornerstone property that's about a 1213 million project um they were able to get about $7 million from the state and then needed additional local funds um which they were able to pair with home funds and get $2 million there so that is um and thinking about how to make 16th and Main Street successful um we think the best

10:05 path forward is to pair that with the home funding RFP process and so award both the property and the available home funds to a developer who comes in through a competitive process um and right now we have about $750,000 available in home funds and so that would be a fall RFP um it's as soonest we can make that available um I will say we did have a conversation with Oregon Housing and Community Services just to confirm how would you receive this property if it came in as far as location goes and they said it made it met all of their criteria for funding and so we feel confident it would sort of be able to be supported in that way if there was a project um but how could we support it at the local funding as well so that's where the home funding

10:51 pairing is um being proposed um I think that's all I yeah I think that was it um go ahead Cory thank you thank you as you know I'm like I'm all over this and I'm so excited to see how it keeps evolving that 750k in home in home funds is that specific like Springfields part of that okay because I know in the last couple session Cycles or whatever we call them we haven't really had anything to throw in the pot so I was like have we saved that up or do we have to share that is our two like a twoyear I think that is our second two years worth of home funds because with the 16th and Q site we sort of gave everything we had with the $2.2 million award great y so exciting thank

11:39 you other questions um so do we have any indication from the county or at some point properties are going to come available again through the tax foreclose process assum yeah I would assume so right like that's they do it about annually at some point maybe even twice a year as I understand there's a sherff sale twice a year and so the property manager has um as I understand their renewed process is to reach out to all of the jurisdictions within the county that have a property and sort of ask the question okay so we we're kind of tracking that and it's going to develop whenever whenever it's going to develop yeah and I will say um as I understand it in heard the manual a

12:24 non oh Christina you want to jump in oh I was just going to say I think there There's an opportunity to make the same question um available for a nonprofit or someone else to step in to acquire it for low-income purposes okay good CH there was a change in Oregon state law in this last last legislative session to address a constitutional decision regarding tax foreclosures that has temporarily halted any Deeds being issued as a result of the tax foreclosure process so the city has to have a deed in hand um out of that tax forclosure process before we could take further steps um there's at least I I don't have the details in front of me on timeline but it's at least a year for the legislature to adopt a change to the general County tax forclosure process

13:10 properties can still be foreclosed but they can't actually change title um in the duration while the state's figuring out how to address that constitutional issue um doesn't affect the properties that we quieted title on already um but it would make it difficult to use that process um and meet the December 31st 2025 spending deadline so I I guess I kind of think about it in a couple of tracks one of them is now that we've acquired certain amount of properties and we have Capital that to go towards building right like now we have to sort of shift and you know break ground on the work that we've got and um you know and I am fine pairing the home funds that we have with 16th Street um that is a com very common model like that and then as I think about us coming out of

13:55 that next section of from my housing develop perspective then then we'll be back to the question okay to promote housing how do we find more how do we find more land and what does that look like and whatever the situation situation may look uh may look like um the question that I've got is um really we've got multiple sort of sources of funding right and I thought counciler brought up a good point which is we have a mobile definition of you know what we're actually looking for and you as we refine the housing program it would be nice to sort of Harden you know what we mean by certain certain definitions because it just uh it just is one of those things where because

14:41 where the funds are coming from what we're talking about on a giving you know you affordable housing low-income housing market housing can all mean different things and I think it it helps with that sort of transparency and Clarity with the community about what are we trying to do why are we trying to do it we'll brainstorm that I don't have any good ideas on how to get it done you will be invol all right any other questions all right it looks good I think you're getting the head nod to keep going and we'll see you when we see you again thank you thank you all right uh second item is Market study for non-un employees and update to

15:28 compensation plans with the cham good evening mayor and Council my name is Cham Herz I'm the Human Resources Director for the City of Springfield and I am here with Ken Stefan who is the senior HR analyst the purpose of tonight's work session is to provide council with some information Rel to uh an AIS that's going to be submitted on July 1st uh requesting authorization for the city manager to approve the pay ranges for our non-union employees um the purpose of our work session really was to um explain kind of

16:14 this the the thought and the process and um that went into the recommendation and to answer any questions that Council has before we move this towards uh an agenda item on the on July 1st um as a little background because I know that there's a few new coun and it's not something we do a lot um the non-rep um compensation cycle follows a three-year uh model um where it essentially is a lead meets and falls behind so we we adjust the pay ranges every three years uh we do a very intensive process we engage a consultant um and in this case not only did we engage in a consultant but we also look at our regional comparators um to make a recommendation so through the work through the Consultants uh there's a

17:00 attachment that was included in your packet which kind of summarize the Benchmark positions it's not possible for us to look at every position um but what we do is we look at the Benchmark positions and we look at the market midpoint of those pay ranges uh and through kind of compiling of those uh individual positions uh we found that we were lagging the market by slightly over 8.5% um and because our pay cycle has a moving forward model where we're trying to predict where we're going to be sitting in fiscal year 26 we applied an aging factor which is what we've traditionally have done um historically we've adjusted that by 4% or 2% a year understanding that we're going to fall behind the market in the third year um

17:46 and we've underestimated what the uh economy's been through that period And so this time we've aged that or making a recommendation for aging that 6% uh which gots which gets us to that 15 a half% um so our recommendation is that we adjust all pay ranges by 15 a half% um and then the way individuals actually move into the pay range as they move to the nearest step that provides at least 3% uh We've budgeted um or did a cost analysis of what that's going to look like and it has an implementation cost of a little over 5 and a half percent which is slightly ahead of the or slightly more than the budgetary forecast that we had um we kind of knew that this was coming uh I came I think in October of last year and indicated that I felt we were about 17 to 20% uh

18:32 and we did a small adjustment at that time and that data seemed to be supported by the evidence both from Gallagher as well as the additional um analysis that I did on my own so that's a lot of talking um I will pause to see if there's any any particular questions that that Council has Victoria I'm just curious because the I I see the 15.5 across the board but I'm wondering about when some of the positions are only you know a couple percent off and then some of them are over 30% off that doesn't seem very fair to the folks that are so far off that we're that we're only closing the Gap you know slightly for them where we're doing much more for others so that's

19:19 that that's my curiosity about that how we handle that yeah so it's a complicated question and and I'm aware of a communication that was sent uh I disagree with uh both with Gallagher is representing uh based on the the data that I looked at and and the information we got from Gallagher uh initially I will tell you for that particular position Gallagher had it at about 133% um I have it slightly less than that um and and part of the complexity is when you're looking at Market data you have to not just look at the job title uh and in this case I think Gallagher looked at a job title that wasn't actually accurate for the positions that we were marking um and there are variations based on on cities whether a particular position City recorder is a great example where in some areas uh I think in Roseberg for example it's an assistant city manager

20:05 position in other areas it's a large program manager and so there's variations that you have to kind of look at the data a little bit a little bit cleaner um the other key aspect is orgon Equal Pay Act and so we Broadband our positions which means that we look at positions under what's called a decision Band Method and so positions are grouped comparably by um by the level of decision-making Authority that they have uh and so what we try to do is we try to Target key Benchmark positions make sure that we're looking at that and then we group those positions under the dbm and then I do another analysis to confirm whether or not uh there's anything that is uh you know creating an a market disadvantage that we don't want to face uh and through my analysis I don't see

20:50 that that's actually an accurate projection and in fact I feel like this puts us in a pretty good Market position um the other key part is when we're looking at this data we're we're looking at it at the market mid-step uh and most of our comparators have pay range wids that are roughly around 25 to 30% and we have a 40% width and so there's an additional 5% that's on the top end um and then on top of that if we feel like we're falling significantly Market behind the option we have is what we have is We call we call them Shadow steps or hidden steps Market steps and so there's two additional steps that are not used unless we fall at a market disadvantage and then we have the ability to open those steps um I have done a great deal of analysis on this and and there are certainly going to be some positions

21:35 where we're more competitive in the market than others that's that's always the case uh we try to Target in and around plus or minus 8% um at the midpoint uh and I feel the 15 and a half percent does that um pretty effectively and so if let's just say any of these non- rep positions were to become vacated in the next three years do you feel our rates that we're doing are competitive enough that we would actually be able to F that we'd be able to get people to apply and actually be able to fill those with qualified people we're filling positions today at a market serious Market disadvantage um and you know it's I'm looking at a lot of positions um but I feel pretty good about these positions we we've

22:21 historically hamstring ourselves because we've put in a um what we called a cost of Labor adjustment which has uh impact Ed our ability to be competitive in the market by 4 and a half% I've dropped that cost of Labor adjustment in this analysis uh I've looked at all of the positions there are some that you know were at Market or may need to open the market steps but the greater some are putting us in a in a very competitive spot uh I feel far more comfortable with these pay ranges than I did three years ago um that being said it's hard to know what the future is going to look like and uh when I look at comparative contracts because that's really all I can get for a sense of what the market is we're seeing very few contracts that are doing fixed values as far as what

23:06 they're expecting over year after year and most of them are following a CPI cpi's dropped to 32 uh I think it's going to stick around the 3% range um which is why we aged at 6% uh and with that factor I feel pretty comfortable but there probably would be a few positions that will want to open what we call the Market steps or the shadow steps uh as we get into years two or three perfect thank you for thanks we we're gonna go to Nancy first and then we'll come back to Joe oh thank you may I wanted to First recognize chane for all the hard work that you have done and your team as well um uh mayor and Council I I saw his uh multiple spreadsheets that he was working from and uh multiple data points and I would

23:51 say that was a uh very thorough work on your part shame I almost feel like we need to give you the Gallagher money but I can't just hand you people Mone money unfortunately um but I I do say that to say that I do have confidence in uh in James not only his ability to to uh put this together but also his commitment to um having our compensation be fair and Equitable but also reasonable um for our community and I know we are in a very competitive job market and uh we do get compared to other agencies just due to proximity but you know we're very different as far as um our assess value and our property t uh tax base that we can draw from and so our pool that we can draw from as a community is smaller so um I try really hard to lean into

24:38 having a great culture here and I think that um we have wonderful employees that are very helpful and and they work really well together and I it's hard to put a a price on that but I think that that's reflective of the level of talent that you see in the city so I just wanted to mention that thank you Jill thank mayor mayor um I just more of a a comment for shame and and for hopefully for the benefit of others but when a person sees this documentation we see these graphs we got like you said we have where we have a young councel for sure but when you see these numbers like uh counselor Doyle brought up and that's a valid question yes I read the uh the

25:24 information sent into us via email Etc and I I get that but I think that it may be helpful for not only you but for the council in its entirety or generally speaking is that when when you see and for example the Gallagher data is that something you pull or is that something that we pay for someone to do an analysis number one that's not really explained but secondly is that when you see a at least when I see a disparity in some of those uh positions that are you know 20 some odd perent 30% greater it's I think it'd be worth your while to add an addendum piece of information to your packet that the counselor see that you address those specific uh high points

26:11 instead of trying to uh Feed Us water through a fire hose in a sense where there's a lot of information you're telling you're talking about how that all makes sense that you believe it's fair but I think some of it some folks will absorb it better when you potentially summarize those anomalies and that I think will really help the Comfort level for everybody that's making these decisions and I I know it would for me because when you get something from out in left field like we did it's like Whoa We got to take a look at this because I got to tell you that information sent in look looks squared away to me it looks looks like it very well uh put together and a lot of thought put into it but then you're saying well that I we see that but this is the reasoning behind it and so here

26:58 I'm looking at that saying okay well which one makes more sense and I and it's very complex especially what you're doing and I appreciate and I've really appreciated the job you've been doing since the moment you took over that position you've done a wonderful work so um anyway I just thought I'd throw that out there and I appreciate again your work you're put together but I think a little more information uh added to your packet even if it's late coming in would be would be helpful thank you Corey thank you um and I also really appreciate the work that you've done and the time that I've been here and um as you know I get to do just enough HR to be dangerous um I really appreciate you calling out the difference between a job title and the the job duties and what it

27:45 looks like within the organization because that's as you sort of pointed out and I think people are sharing that's a lot of the complexity that we may have a job title but how that works within this organization may look very different in terms of number of reports and how much Authority and all that um but I do have a question because and since you mentioned the Oregon pay Equity act do we in the City of Springfield have a process by which a a an individual could you know submit a pay Equity challenge or whatever at some point do we have any process where people could say hey I don't think I'm being paid fairly and then we go through an evaluation of them individually yeah sorry I was trying to figure out whether I was suppos to respond to some of counselor pioner

28:30 comments tooed right in that's fine um so for counselor pitar um we'll certainly take that feedback and add more documentation to the AIS that we're submitting on July 1 uh and for everybody's knowledge Gallagher is a outside consulting firm that we utilize um on a regular basis but uh primarily to do a large um comp survey which is part of our SEIU contract and so our non- reps traditionally follow the seu model and methodology um which is we engage the consultant they provide us feedback Gallagher like um all entities has gone through some transition and turnover and changes and so the data that we've historically provided which was a much more robust PowerPoint um

29:18 didn't really have the right substance that we were looking for to to present that uh and um and actually some of their pay ranges were proposed to be a little bit less and so we were trying to find find The Sweet Spot for that um so the the answer to your question Council broadly related to processes and pay Equity yes we have a we both we have a policy that outlines kind of the the process if they feel like it's a pay Equity issue uh we also have a a process for individuals that feel like their position is either in the wrong grade or wrong classification uh and that's outlined in our regrade reclassification administrative regulation where they're able to submit documentation to support why they feel that way um so there are

30:06 ways in which people could do that and like everybody else has a bit taken back um by the communication because our our general process has not changed over the six years that I've been here which is we look at the overarching data uh we use that to align ourselves in some form to a market model um and then we from there have to do maybe some additional fine tuning on positions to determine whether they're graded properly or not uh or whether the market data point is correct or not and in this case uh you know Gallagher uh had a weird data point on a couple of position classifications I went and validated that by looking at comparable communities in the geographical area that we live in which

30:51 invol includes Corvalis Albany Eugene uh Medford tiger Beaverton I know I'm missing somebody Bend uh and so I that's the the physical data that I went and pulled and looked at um my data point came back very different where I feel like uh that particular person's position if you look at the top step of that range would be sitting at 11.6 above Market once again I'm trying to Target a 6 perish above Market uh and it's 5.8 at the mid-step um which is ideal for what we're trying to do with my 15 and a half percent um and those conversations could have happened and I could have provided the data to show that um so I do feel comfortable with that um and I do feel

31:39 comfortable uh that we'll be in a in a much better spot than we've been in over the last three years um it's going to take some time because when you do a large pay range movement you get compression on the bottom end because people move to the nearest step that provides three and so while our pay ranges will be at Market we will have individuals that will be potentially below what they might get at another entity because of how that step movement Works um but as far as the pay ranges go I feel reasonably as comfortable as I can feel about that and and I'm really comfortable with the process of both uh looking at the data that we got from our consultant but also validating that with our local geographical comparators thank you and thank you for doing all this work I I know that it's it's it's not like we're just throwing darts at a dart

32:24 board I know that it's it's a big project and I appreciate it thank you so um the the work looks really good uh the questions I had and I thought you brought up a really good point about City Records that go all the way from assistant city managers to I swear there's a hundred cities that that's the only employee right so it's a why a wide ranging role yes um when you look at this type of data could you talk a little bit more about how you sort of reconcile sort of same job title and maybe not same job responsib abilities is that something Gallagher does or is that something you do when you get the data um so Gallagher provides data for us and and once again to answer counselor pisser's comment which I was I

33:09 was a little bit vague that the data we got from Gallagher included both salary survey materials that they purchase and pull data from and it also included a custom survey that we requests that they send out to entities that we've used year after year there's about 17 of them and so you're you're counting on whatever you respond um historical Gallagher has taken the 80% approach with some of that um I'm I'm not saying I'm comfortable or not comfortable with that but uh generally what we try to do is we you look at the data you look at the job descriptions uh and then you the first indicator for me usually is I look at the job title I plug in the pay range and if the pay range seems dramatically different than what everybody else is paying then I start digging in a little

33:55 bit deeper to find out what's the true story for that uh in my world besides before I came here we would manipulate that data a little bit where we knew that there was some differences uh in it that needed to be adjusted um because of the way that they're structured uh a great example would be the city of Eugene's um HR Director role is is very different than what it is here doesn't serve on the executive team um and then there are some executive roles that are very different than their counterpart that we would have here at Springfield so those aren't always the best data points that you want to look at and so uh you have to kind of do a little bit of massaging and then you have to decide whether or not that's a good data point or not and then you you pull that out I try to make sure that my data points that I'm using locally that I Le have at

34:40 least three of them um I'm looking at roughly six or seven uh and if I've got less than three data points it's probably not a very good accurate indicator um but it gives me some indication if if I'm in the ball game or not um so there's a lot of Science and a lot of art that goes into trying to get this to to be fair and equitable um that's that's really um great feedback and then like I'm fine with the recommendation about how we go forward I know you're going to bring it back from a resolution perspective um when you think about you know sort of the next four or five years right we've had this you know pay structure for a while right is this going to be is there something where you're like as a HR professional you're like hey we are good you know this is the this is the best process we can have

35:26 or there other tweet TW down down the road that we could make well we're looking for some tweaks so we're we're going to kick the tires and figure out whether or not Gallagher model is the right model for us or whether we should be exploring a different way of looking at it um you know the the feedback obviously is you want to be more Market driven uh the unanswered question is organs equal a Pay Act and how does that apply and um and so for all of those reasons uh once we Implement we're going to start transitioning into either some sort of RFP or RFI to kind of decide whether or not we want to look at some a different way of doing things and so we anticipate coming back to council within the next year or two with a different um idea on on what this may look like moving forward okay that's great that's great

36:11 to hear I appreciate you thinking forward here um any other uh questions and I think we are good with the recommendation then thank you appreciate it all right thank you I'm going to go ahead and AD during the work session we will be back on this link at 7:00 for the regular session it's not very often I get to use the gavl all right I'm going to call the regular session of the Springfield City Council to order with roll call Mayor Van Gordon here councelor Weber here councelor moan here councel rodley here councel Blackwell here councel Doyle here and councelor pisher here

36:59 if oh please join me with the pr of Allegiance One Nation indivisible there are two two times designated for public testimony this evening under business from the audience and public hearings if you are attending in person please complete the request to speak card located at the city recorder desk

37:45 in the council chambers and turn them in to the city recorder if you are joining us online with a tablet smartphone computer in wish to speak at either of those times please raise your hand uh use the raised hand future in Zoom the order of public testimony is as follows anyone in person in the council chambers and anyone who has raised their virtual hand before I call the first item tonight I do want to note I know a lot of you are here for the phant annexation hearing there was a revised agenda that pushed that item a little bit further down the uh down the list just be aware of it the updated agendas are printed over there first item please first item is Springfield upbeat mayor's

38:31 recognition we have a special recognition this evening Brian conin 45 years of service and Nancy this is your item uh thank you mayor and Council so I am going to actually go to the standing area there and invite Neila to join me as well as Brian conin I don't believe James chame is here so you're fine without your badge apologies for those I have my back to I'm trying to not my back to the

39:17 audience um Brian you're so important it takes two of us to do this we we had to I had to uh delegate some of this so I'm so honored tonight to um recognize your service to the city which has just been absolutely phenomenal but I want to stay for the record this is not a retirement announcement so don't get any ideas and don't get comfortable uh we just thought it was a special occasion and we wanted to celebrate with you because we love to celebrate around here and you're a lot of fun to celebrate with so uh he was I have notes because I I can't there's too much so Brian was hired by the city in May of 1979 um in review of his three-month evaluation in August of 1979 his

40:02 supervisor wrote Brian is progressing as he should if he continues to gain experience and knowledge he will become a valuable member of the Sewer Crew which you did and so much more Joe Curry uh and and indeed he did so you continued in your progress you became a supervisor in 1988 uh maintenance man manager in 2007 and DPW division director in 2019 um and you have managed every program um operations manages from facilities supervisor to subsurface supervisor streets traffic you know everything um and as the division

40:47 director you lead one of the most diverse divisions in the city and it's a group that provides direct in-person connection with our community and I know that it's a personal goal of viewers to bring up people in this industry and encourage uh people to get into trades as a as a great field to get into so um Neil is going to add a few comments from your colleagues yep thank you Brian it's honor to uh share with you some of the comments your colleagues had about your years here um so the first one is Brian emanates Springfield he has deep roots in the community and knows everyone it's true he cares deeply

41:33 for our community his staff family and friends he serves as a mentor to staff in the city in many cases without folks even knowing it he is a pleasure to be around and lifts up everyone with this positive attitude over the years Brian's actions have both directly and indirectly led to making Springfield a great place to live work and play and that's from Matt Stout the ESD director who's here this evening um one of the most important accomplishments is Brian's ability to grow and lead the people of the Operations Division in a compassionate manner that is unmatched he has a natural ability to love people for who they are show sincere care listen and guide I've learned a lot about myself and how to be a public servant um and how a public servant

42:19 should act just from watching him and that's from B Ben Gibson our operation maintenance manager who's also in the back there and Brian is super supportive of engineering and is always looking for and encouraging areas of collaboration it's clear that every action he takes he not only cares about operations employees but every employee who works for the city his passion for doing the best for Springfield comes through in every conversation no matter how trivy tricky or difficult that just happened today and he is really um he really is an institution and he does know everyone at the city both past and present as well as Citizens and business owners and that's from Jeff Pascal our community development director right in the back there and then we have one more

43:05 45 years into his career and Brian continues to show up for a community with Incredible energy passion and knowledge he knows every corner of Springfield and is constantly innovating ways to make life better for our community members Brian is a teacher mentor and trusted advisor and just as important as the information he continues to pass on is the way way Brian makes you feel he treats people with a dignity and respect that truly comes from his heart and I'm thankful for the many years we've worked together and that's for me thank you yeah so oh yes so if you want to say a few words and then we'll take a picture yeah I guess uh before I even reflect uh like

43:50 to introduce my wife Stacy she would you stand up Stacey anyway uh yeah when I started here in 1979 um I saw her in elementary school she was a ninth grade no she was nine years old so some of you might go yuck but we're actually 12 and a half years apart and I met her SE or we've been married 27 years so uh and she is a lot of What charges my batteries so uh so why would somebody stay 45 years I'll turn and face you it's because I get to work with uh a phenomenal public and people that give uh I get paid you don't and I've seen you all for years and years and years and councils and

44:36 Mayors before you dating back uh 45 years so uh and I have so much respect and just uh gratefulness that uh confidence has been instilled in me given me to be able to be a leader uh and just play uh you know come to work and play and so uh I I'm just grateful um I probably have a little bit more in the tank but not a lot so I'm glad that uh I was able to come here uh tonight I want to just talk real quickly about the Operations Division I work with a f just phenomenal uh unbelievable family and staff and an amazing managers uh Management Group but uh all of you that

45:22 come every uh every night to council or Monday nights to council all of my colleagues that I work with in the many departments just so much respect for you and thank you you've mentored to me I feel like I get more mentored uh as each day goes by by a lot of young staff that are just killing it so thank you for this honor and I appreciate it very Brian hey Brian come back up they're not I'm not even going to let you guys take the picture yet until the council get to say something a little bit nice Brian okay so I I will tell you we are extremely grateful um for you as an individual and one of the things that

46:08 always speaks to me is just how curious about our community you are I've been in tough conversations about Ops and streets and and you've always approached it with really an open mind and an open heart for people and that's really made our job as elected officials easier and it frankly has you know served the citizens well and the thing that I always appreciate you is you're just heart of service I enjoy every conversation we've had and just your passion for the infrastructure in the city you know I learn something every time we chat and we couldn't do our job without you so thank you so much thank you sir Joe thank you may so Brian you um are an amazing individual um we met 20 years

46:55 ago I think or more when I was at the Sheriff's Office and I was trying to work with you and trying to figure out how we can get people to work here in Springfield Etc with work Crews and you know and many many different things since then from very very huge things happening to the city and things that that little things that people call me about or I call you and say hey is there a possibility and you have always said sure don't worry about it I got it and you I think I even talked to you while you responded to a call I think you were even in El camp and I'm like just crazy but uh When someone tells you or someone says hey you're crazy for staying there that long you can tell them no I'm not my my heart is with Springfield it shows

47:43 every single time we've seen you every in your work um you bringing up people like you know like Ben from from the get-go and and and modeling him to to be a great supervisor um so I have the utmost respect for you you I've never questioned anything that you have said or said you can do or what you would be willing to do not even a blink of an eye and I I hold you very very high in my in my respect scale so thank you so much for your work and I really do appreciate you a ton thank you Victoria well I haven't had the opportunity to know you as long as some other people but I know that um you've always been very open to my questions about public works and the things um and

48:30 you just I just see honesty in you and I it's easy to trust you because I I believe that you're you just have a good heart and I think that it really showed in January when we had that ice storm and you and you were preparing days beforehand and the amount of work that you and your Crews did and what you went to and what I don't think the the community realizes how much you guys did um during that with what you have with the resources that we had and so I thank you and I hope you'll stick around for a lot more than just a few more years thank you couny thank you um and as you know but probably not everybody this like I am I am such a fan and I am such a fan of your team and I'm such a fan of the work and it's it's um Neil knows because

49:16 whenever I get to deal with a street or something I get so excited because so much of this is messy but it's like this is this is you know what touches people's lives and one of the things that I have appreciated so much from even before I was on Counsel is just you know often if someone's worked someplace a long time they get stuck and your embracing of innovation and of trying to diversify the staff and creating apprentic apprenticeship programs and bringing in more women and more people of color and those are things that just speak to my heart in terms of where we are going as a city and creating you know prosperity and access for folks and so I have so appreciated working with

50:01 you and I'm so glad I get to continue to work with you and just think you've done a fantastic job and and the mayor can testify that I keep saying there's no way you've been here 45 years like you are not 45 years an employee because you're clearly doing you know you're still so fresh so thank you so much and um we appreciate you thank you likewise my hair was black so and I haven't had as much time either but I'm so glad that I did get appointed in time before you do decide to retire because it's been a pleasure getting to know you and you've just been so welcoming and so wonderful and always easy to talk to and you can just tell by the anyone else that's spoke about you tonight your your character and I just appreciate you giving 45 years to

50:47 Springfield thank you thank you C black uh we had a city engineer once came the city manager when Nancy decides to retire you'll find me way up in the wow someplace yeah probably not willing to come down so all right I think we're ready to let you have your picture Michelle well it's hard I mean everything that everyone has said is is so true um and I've only been here for about a year and a half but I've enjoyed every interaction we've had and 45 years is a huge accomplishment and the city is very lucky to have had you thank you

51:32 very much looking over it for that long so I was hoping this was G to be about two minutes yeah well good luck but I made it longer too thank you very much thanks bran you're not quite done in the middle okay

52:17 look no we we'll use them in a minute next item I move we approve the consent calendar second NE could you call a vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell yes councel Doyle I and councel pisher I thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please next I our public hearings uh public hearing number one is the fiscal year 20242 City budget adopt Nathan Bell is here for this

53:08 item uh good evening mayor and councel um on the evenings of May 13th 14th and 15th of this year the city's budget committee uh met to consider and recommend the budget to city council uh the resolution and exhibit in front of you this evening is such budget uh we're requesting that you conduct a public hearing and take action on this item this evening are there any questions I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing I've got no cards appears we have no hands for this item I'm going to close the public hearing mayor I'd like to make a motion to hang on my page just flipped I apologize I make a motion to adopt resolution adopting the physical the fiscal year 2425 City of Springfield

53:54 budget making Appropriations and imposing a categorizing and categorizing the tax I'll second NE could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councel Blackwell yes councelor Doyle hi and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please public hearing number two is a resolution certifying the city's eligibility to receive state shared revenue from cigarette marijuana gas and liquor taxes Jessica mummy is here for this item good evening mayor and Council my name is Jessica Mummy I'm the city's budget and procurement manager here this evening for a routine item that's in

54:40 support of the fiscal year 25 budget adoption process that you just heard with Nathan state law provides that cities located within a county that have a population of 100,000 or more according to the most F most recent federal census must provide for or more specified services to be eligible to receive state shared revenues the state shared revenues are the liquor cigarette Highway and marijuana tax apportionments cities are required to take steps necessary which include holding a public hearing at both the budget committee and city council adopting resolutions and completing required tax certifications with the state of Oregon to receive the apportionment of revenues in the fiscal year 25 budget there is just over $2

55:25 million budgeted in the general fund due to the state shared Revenue apportionment that's all I have this evening for this item are there any questions from the council I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing I don't have any cards for this item Neil do you have anybody raising their hand online appears we have no hands for this item I'm going to close the public hearing mayor I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution of the common Council of the City of Springfield certifying eligibility for State shared revenues from cigarette marijuana G gas and liquor taxes and approving the city of Springfield's participation in the state revenue sharing program second Neil could you call the

56:11 vote please yes councel Weber yes councelor Mo yes councel rodley 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 the fiscal year 24 supplemental budget number four and Jessica mummy is here for this item as well sorry good evening mayor and Council Jessica mummy budget and procurement manager here for supplemental budget number four for the fiscal year 24 at various times during the fiscal year council is requested to adjust the annual budget to reflect needed changes in planning activities to recognize new revenues or make other required changes these adjustments to resources and requirements change the current budget

56:57 and are processed through supplemental budget requests that are scheduled by the finance department tonight will be the fourth and final fiscal year 24 supplemental budget request to come before Council a summary of key supplemental budget items that were contained in your packet include increasing Police Department operating expenses to support overtime increasing Fire and Life Safety operating expenses to support overtime increasing the development in public works capital projects expenditure to provide funding needed for the ODOT Mill Street reconstru reconstruction project ODOT required the city um deposit funds sooner than anticipated and prior to any activity taking place on the project and finally increasing Police Department operating expenses

57:44 offset by Grant revenues to support training for the Department that's all I have for this item vior so the question for me would be on the Mill Street since that was but money that was sounds like budgeted in the future or was coming out of a different pot is that going to be replaced is there going to be a different supplement for that yes um that item was put in for a different project so we're simply taking money from one project that hasn't started yet moving it to the Mill Street project and in fiscal year 25 that'll be Tred up any other questions all right I'm going to go and open the public hearing I don't have any cards for this item NE do we have anybody online no hands for this item

58:29 I'm going to close the public hearing mayor I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution adjusting resources and requirements in the following funds General special Revenue building code fire local Levy op local option Levy development projects Street Capital sanitary sewer operations Regional Wastewater ambulance and storm drainage operations second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley 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 Master fees and

59:16 charges update Jessica mummy this is your last item of the evening thank you mayor and Council my name is Jessica mummy budget procurement manager here this evening for the um public hearing on Master fees and charges for fiscal year 25 on February 26 the city's Finance director Nathan Bell met with Council for guidance on an escalator percentage to use for the upcoming annual adjustments at that meeting Council provided staff feedback to utilize a 5% escalator for fees driven by Staffing costs a 3.3% escalator for fees driven by the CPI inflation and 2 2.6% for system devel development charges utilizing the construction cost index list and the engineering news

1:00:01 record on April 8th I came before Council to provide an update on the master fees and charges schedule at that meeting a Redline diversion was presented and provided for Council review and feedback using the escalators provided by Council to staff after this meeting several additional discussions took place with Council regarding fees contained in the schedule these discussions included the Santa pack annual rate adjustment the housing diversity tax exemption fee Wastewater and storm water rates and the planning and Engineering development fees staff have Incorporated the revised Santa pack rates the housing and diversity tax fee or tax exemption fee and Wastewater and storm water rates as approved by Council a new fee proposed which is the

1:00:47 residential driveway parking review fee was added after the work session held on April 8th as the master fees and charges schedule contain fees from a variety of departments each department is responsible for setting and recommending their prospective fees based on a variety of factors representatives from each department are available to answer any questions related to their specific fees that's all I have are there any questions all right I'm going to go and open the public hearing I don't have any cards for this item Neil do we have anybody online no answer this item I'm going to close the public hearing mayor I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution amending Master

1:01:33 fees and charges scheduled chapters 1- 10 with an effective date of July 1 2024 I'll second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley councelor Blackwell councel Doyle and Council pisher yes thank you motion passes suceed yeses zero NOS thank you thank you very much next item please next item is public hearing number five this is annexation of territory to the City of Springfield and will lamalan Park and Recreation District Annex 0.37 Acres of residential property located at map 18- 02- 06-14 tax slot

1:02:18 06200 withdrawing the same territory from the Willakenzie rural Fire Protection District this is an ordinance annexing certain territory 904 filbert Lane to the City of Springfield and willane Park and Recreation District withdrawing the same territory from the will Kenzie rural Fire Protection District adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date this is a first reading and Tom sers is here for this item good evening mayor and City councilors I am Tom sers senior planner with the current planning section tonight the council is requested to consider an ordinance to Annex an approximately 37 acre area that includes

1:03:05 one tax lot in South Central Springfield next slide please the proposed annexation area is highlighted in red and is improved with a residential dwelling the applicant is the property owner and they have requested annexation to receive city services to facilitate a future residential partition next slide please the site is zoned R1 lowdensity residential with The urbaniza Fringe uf1 overlay as you can see it is contiguous to the city limits immediately to the Northeast and West if annexation is approved no other zoning changes are requested except for the removal of the uf1 overlay with annexation the subject property will be removed from the Special Districts such as the uf1

1:03:50 overlay depicted here and service area such as the willin Zoll Fire Protection District No Other zoning changes will occur with this annexation there are four approval criteria for annexations in the Springfield development code which were fully analyzed in the staff report and summarized as follows Criterion a within ugb and contiguous to the city limits as previously stated the subject property is contiguous to the city limits along its Northeast and Western boundaries subject territory is within the city's Urban growth boundary and is currently covered by the uf1 overlay Criterion B consistent with the policies of the metro plan policies 27 29 33 34 and 35 of the

1:04:37 2030 comprehensive plans urbanization element are met through this application as the annex land will be fully within Springfield urban service area Criterion C within boundary for minimum level of key Urban facilities to be received in a timely and efficient manner policy 29 31 and 32 of the 2030 comprehensive plans urbanization element are met through this application as well if annexation is approved the subject territory can easily obtain key facilities and services from the filbert Lane and North Street rights of way again these facilities and services will include sanitary sewer connection subwater and electric service fire protection services from the Eugene Springfield Fire Department and police

1:05:22 services from Springfield police the subject site is currently within the will amane parking recre Recreation District Criterion D annexation agreement an annexation agreement that outlines the applicants' financial responsibilities for provision of public streets and utilities necessary to serve the property is required when there are fiscal impacts associated with the annexation this application does not have any required public improvements associated with the annexation therefore an agreement is not required because all applicable annexation criteria have been met and the annexation will help facilitate bringing this property into the city limits City staff recommends in the future that the application be

1:06:08 considered for approval by Council thank you and I here for any questions are there any questions all right I'm going to open the public hearing I have no cards for this item it appears we have no hands for this item I'm going to goad and close the public hearing this is first reading no action next item please next item is public hearing number six is annexation of property between 7527 and 7655 thiron road map and tax slot 17- 02- 35-- 03200 and 3603 and approximately 1,175 ft of thirston road right of way

1:06:54 this is an ordinance Annex ing certain territory vacant property between 7527 and 7655 thirston Road and identified as assessors map 17-02 d3500 tax SLS T tax slots 32000 and 3603 and approximately 60 foot wide by 1,175 ft long segment of thirston road rideway to the City of Springfield and waman Park and Recreation District withdrawing the same territory from Mackenzie fire and rescue District adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date this is a second reading and Andy limbert is here for this item thank you good evening mayor and councel this item was opened as a public

1:07:39 hearing on June 3 and at the recommendation of Staff the public hearing and record was held open to this evening's meeting staff did receive two items of written testimony that were submitted into the record this evening and you should have copies of them um one was from an adjacent property owner of tax Lot number 100 and staff did discuss the annexation with them at the development and Public Works counter to clarify that tax slot 100 which they own is not part of the annexation territory um it would the staff wanted to point out that in drawing a boundary around the area and looking at it from a neighborhood scale it's difficult to differentiate properties that adjoin it and that have smaller dimensions and so

1:08:25 staff did want to clarify that this tax lot represented by Mr White is not part of the annexation area this evening the other testimony that was received from adjacent property owner concerns future development plans for the property and staff did want to clarify a couple of items of concern that they had noted which were uh effects on Schools transportation Transit and other improvements uh when annexations are presented uh to staff they're shared with all the referral agencies including the Springfield Utility Board Lane Transit District wama Lane uh Springfield School District so these agencies are aware of future potential for development when annexations occur there will be subsequent steps once the property is annexed should it be

1:09:11 approved for annexation by the council um development plans would have to be forwarded there's public opportunities as well once those development plans are presented to see details as to the nature of the development proposed for the site staff has General understanding that with the residential zoning of this property there will be residential dwellings on the site as to the exact configuration and density and that sort of thing um that is yet to be seen and so it's premature for staff to either speculate or to try to share um un unfinished plans uh that the developer might come forward with so um at this point is only annexation of the property that is being considered this evening and because there are potential fiscal

1:09:57 impacts with this annexation an annexation agreement has been prepared and it was actually signed by the applicant it was entered uh delivered to staff very late so we made it into the packet this evening and so Council has an opportunity to consider um adopting the ordinance this evening it does not have to be continued to another public hearing date um unless Council deems it necessary so I'd be happy to answer any other questions are there any questions the hearing is still open um I'm going to see if there's any I don't have any more cards for this item Neil do you have any hands up appears we have no hands for this item I'm G to go close the public hearing I think we're ready for motion

1:10:52 Joe I am looking I think this was just a second continue yeah first reading to continue to one no um sorry this is the second reading I I've mixed up my agenda items I apologize this is the second reading you should close the hearing um and record tonight which you've done and then you can vote on the ordinance if you would like sorry so I think we're ready to vote on the ordinance we may need you to draft a quick motion for us because there's not one prepared all right in the agenda you can just move to approve the ordinance and then just read that ordinance title right y did you get that Joe got it yep so I'd like to make a motion to approve the ordinance annexing certain territorial

1:11:37 property between oh my gosh now I've got on uh between 7527 and 6 7655 thirston Road and identified asess access assessor map 17- 02- 35- 0000 tax slots the 32363 and an approximately 60 foot wide by 1,170 ft long segment of The Thirst Road right of way to the City of Springfield and waman Park and Recreation District withdrawn the the same territory from the Mackenzie fire and rescue District adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date I will second you could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor

1:12:23 Mo yes councelor rodley yes councel Blackwell yes councel Doyle I and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please this public hearing number seven an annexation of territory to the City of Springfield Annex approximately 2.44 Acres of industrial property in Glenwood located at 331 Franklin Boulevard map 17- 03- 34-33 tax lot 100 this is an ordinance annexing certain territory property address as 3331 Franklin Boulevard and identified as assessors map 17- 03- 34-33 tax slot 100 to the City of Springfield and Laman Park and

1:13:08 Recreation District withdrawing the same territory from the Glenwood water district adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date this is a second reading Andy limbert is here for this item yes thank you Neil and good evening again mayor and councel um um staff has uh recommended at the June 3D meeting that this uh item be carried over to the June 17th meeting as a public hearing to be continued and the record held open staff has not received a response from the applicant as to the status of their concerns about annexation agreement Provisions um apparently their council is working on a response to the city we have not received it it was not received in time for the packet and therefore um staff is

1:13:54 recommending that this item be carried forward they continue public hearing hold the public record open until the next regular meeting which is July 1 and that's all I have all right thank you any questions for Andy all right I hav got no cards for this item Neil do we have anybody raising their hand no hands for this item okay then this is second reading we are going to continue a public hearing until July 1st 2024 next item please those are your public hearings for this evening the next item is business from the audience I've got some instructions so it's just going to be a minute now is the time on the agenda for the council to hear business from the

1:14:39 audience if you have signed up to speak to the council regarding the annexation of property near game farm in pheasant Boulevard the public hearing and record in that matter were closed following the hearing on June 3rd while you may speak to the council at this time the Council cannot consider any new information and public comments made after the hearing and record were closed the council will make its decision based on the information that is already in their record which includes all public testimony provided to the city council during the public hearing on June 3rd the reason we cannot consider new testimony tonight is because this process is a land use decision that has special requirements under the state under state law the assistant City attorney can give us a better

1:15:24 explanation of what that process requires thank you mayor this is Christina assistant City attorney this annexation is a type three process under the Springfield development code which means that it's a quasi judicial decision in that the council is acting more like a judge ruling on a specific application than um as the council's normal legislative role adopting policies and laws for the city as a whole quasi judicial decisions carry certain rights for the applicant and the public Under Oregon state law these rights include an opportunity to be heard at a public hearing an opportunity to present and rebut evidence at that hearing to an impartial decision maker in other words having no prehearing or expart contacts concerning the question

1:16:10 at issue to a record of the decision that's made and to adequate findings for the decision the decision must be based on the criteria of approval for that type of application the council is not allowed to change the criteria or give weight to information that doesn't relate to the criteria to protect these rights of the public and the applicant during an annexation proceeding there are detailed public notice requirements and specific hearing procedures the council has to follow the public hearing for the annexation between Game Farm Road and Fant Boulevard was held on June 3D and anyone with an interest in the annexation had the opportunity to testify or submit evidence at that hearing to the city council the applicant must always have the right to respond to testimony and evidence the

1:16:56 law requires the applicant has the last word on June 3rd the council closed the hearing in the written record basically this means that the council has closed the universe of facts and evidence that you will consider in making your final decision on the criteria of approval to just what was submitted up to and during the June 3D hearing all the testimony and evidence that were submitted honor before June 3r are in the record and are addressed in the staff report and findings for tonight even though the public can address the council during business from the audience the council cannot consider any information or testimony that's related to The Game Farm Road annexation because the hearing and record are closed reopening the

1:17:41 hearing on the spot to take a new testimony without public notice would also violate state law does the council have any questions for me on the on the hearings process from June 3rd or your obligations tonight not seen any questions go ahead just to clarify so you mentioned the EXP parte yeah Communications we've received several emails since June 3 yes um I've not responded to any of those I don't know if others have but how does that have any impact I will address that specifically when we get to that agenda item I just wanted to be sure that the council understood and the public understands the um council's hearing procedures on June 3D so as you're taking in business from the audience tonight what are your obligations okay perfect thank you yeah so when we call

1:18:27 the item she'll go through that so effectively what's going to happen is I will call your card um if you give testimony around um the game fart annexation the we're effectively going to exclude it I'm still going to call your card you still have an opportunity to talk to counsel if you would like um there's several of them if you do not want to talk to uh testify just give me a head nod no and then I will move on to the ne to the next card since the hearing and record are closed on this item uh David Franklin yeah my name is David Franklin I live at 3206 Hollywood and

1:19:13 U I understand that uh your guys's decision on this is is hard I love Springfield I know that I am not in any of your Wards uh I have family members in your WS Friends Church members they are all in those WS but I am not and um I know that this piece of property for annexation it's it's come up in the past and each time it has been shut down and um I am just asking uh you know justice for all on

1:19:59 this uh not just one individual but for all of us that's all I have to say thank you thank you Al Leah hey there um so some of you guys did get an email from me um I'm Aaliyah I live at 3120 orial Street uh we did collect 170 signatures um knowing that the public hearing was over but we needed to codify our opposition to this and you guys will recognize that that is more than just the people who live on these two streets um you know looking at the agenda packet um there was something that the city staff had said in there

1:20:46 which essentially had said um there was an assertion that there will not be any adverse environmental impacts based on the information avail ailable that only can happen if testing is done and that would be a phase 2 environmental site assessment that has not been done to our knowledge no one has advised of that no one has told us any testing of that um and you know some people are familiar with Rails to Trails and different things like that we're talking creosote arsenic lead uh solvents herbicides um in a sense I don't know how assertion can be made as a fact when the testing has not been done so um I know you guys can only

1:21:31 consider so many things but looking at the packet that is on your agenda tonight that assertion only counts essentially if the testing has been done and while no information has been available it's because it's never been up for development before no one has ever considered building on it before so with that information um I hope you guys will consider uh what that means to the people who will live in the area um who will be covered in the dust and the dirt from the possible development if the annexation is approved thank you thank you Janet

1:22:22 bker okay there we go uh my name is Janet Barker I live at 328 for pheasant Boulevard which is uh down near the end where pheasant turns into Oro um bearing in mind the issues that our neighborhoods raised during um the public testimony on June 3 emails uh phone calls letters and the petition um that we signed bearing those issues in mind that we brought up in those uh Communications I just have two things I I'd like to add um I hope each and every one of you were able to physically visit the proposed site um also that you walk down or drove

1:23:08 down pheasant Boulevard and walked or drove down uh rywood very nice homes there um and my feeling is if that 60ft wide strip of land is not wide enough for Ingress and egress on the new city Street then I don't think that strip of land is suitable for property development thank you thank you Megan Watson um yeah my name is Megan Watson she her pronouns and I live at 3310

1:23:54 orial Street um two weeks ago I joined over 20 of my neighbors in speaking out against this annexation um we heard a lot of moving and passionate testimony about the harm and strife annexation and then subsequent development um of these two Parcels would cause as a resident on orial I can speak firsthand about what it's like to have a two story housing um to have two story housing and a road in my backyard um um flood lights shine into my bedroom windows around the clock on nice days like today when you want the windows open um I hear people's alarm clocks go off I hear phones ring doors slam all the other intricacies of life um but I

1:24:40 bought my house with that knowledge so um I knew that that was part of the deal um and I accepted it um and truly the only thing I would change about my house is its proximity to that housing complex um that is the only downside to where I live um 42 of my neighbors many who have spent decades in their homes will now be subject to these same disturbances um they however did not buy their homes with that knowledge even the ones that have bought them recently were not told about plans for annexation or development which have been um in consideration and were part of the advertisement of this property when it

1:25:25 went to auction um but many of those neighbors have cared for and have acted as stewards for the land in question um they've organized and circulated a petition um and they also came here again tonight um all to ask you the same thing and that's to reject this annexation proposal um so when you think about who this decision is going to affect I want you to think about the people who came here to hear it um and the person that applied for the annexation I don't see him in the room um I understand that the land in question does narrowly meet the minimum

1:26:10 criteria for annexation uh but my question is this does the City of Springfield want to be a champion of land use minimums or instead be known for their smart and compassionate neighborhood development thank you thank you B James so no clapping please well I prepared it so I might as well read it I need to practice anyway my name is B James and I live at 3325 pheasant Boulevard right next to where this entire uh development is being

1:26:56 planned and I want to uh address some of the minutes the responses that uh your staff took time to include in last uh the 63 meeting so I only have time for addressing three I have many more concerns about some of the things that were written regarding the concerns of the people that spoke at the last meeting so in response to your claims from the last meeting being being not applicable to the annexation application I have some questions and I understand that you don't have to address my questions but if in the minutes that's a part of your procedure and you can answer these questions in the next follow-up minutes that would be wonderful regarding Historic Landmark uh

1:27:44 I I provided some documentation that I gave in an envelope for you guys um please see attached documentation regarding historic resource Sur listing that cite the lot as contributing historic resource you stated this section of Railway is not listed in the adopted City of Springfield Historic Landmark inventory and my documentation shows otherwise number two regarding contamination of the soil you stated staff consulted the Oregon DEQ for any local listings of Brownfield or otherwise contaminated sites and did not find any records of the subject site therefore information available indicates that there will not be any AD environmental impacts to the Future residential development the fact that there are no records does not mean that

1:28:30 there's no contamination how you negate this concern with absolutely no evidence is unconscionable I request full testing of the soil for the health and safety of all the people and Wildlife that would be at risk with disrupting this land number three regarding the narrow road that is only one foot over the required 20 fot for emergency vehicle safety pass through you state the one-way circulation format proposed for the future development does not apply to emergency access therefore fire and Emergency Services can be provided to the subject site in an orderly and efficient manner at the time for future development please explain how this will work uh most homes are two-car homes there will be new housing members that will that will need to park not only their car uh in their parking lot but or

1:29:17 in their driveway but also if they have another car on the street pheasant um has no side walks we have a very small easement uh so I also want to know what the current rate of traffic flow to Pheasant and Gateway and what the percent increase will be if this development happens and number four do you realize the variances needed for this development will not be met and will have an adverse impact on the other homes in this District by approving the annexation you are acting under the presumption of the variances required to develop this plan which is out of order and I guess I'm out of time so in closing I ask that you please vote no on the annexation thank you Michael

1:30:13 brim evening Mr Mayor and council members uh my name is Michael brm I live at 3203 rywood Avenue uh a few months ago I as a member of the neighborhood I received a notice from the city that uh you are considering uh new development as part of a state legisl legislated U law uh stipulating that a percent certain percentage of housing in each city has to meet um I'm struggling for the term but non-car uh development um commercial residential and business sort of development and one of the areas on the map that you sent was uh between Game Farm Road and Martin Luther King Boulevard we have two Parcels there that

1:30:58 are currently undeveloped those would be great places to build apartments in my opinion and I only speak for myself I'm not here representing anyone else uh compared to the annexation before the council those two areas would be able to provide far more housing than the 27 units uh proposed in this development um it's they have access to bike two bike pass and but bus lines uh the Riverbend Hospital is right there also Gateway Boulevard I've spoken anecdotally to a number of uh res uh fellow members of the neighborhood about this and they've all expressed um interest and even genuine excitement

1:31:44 that uh this sound that sounds like a good way to develop uh the neighborhood and provide more housing in a much more safe and accessible way because it could be designed so that First Responders could have much better access and in the event of an emergency the people who would actually live there would have much easier egress so it would be safer for everyone uh anyone who is saying that the reason that the people in this neighborhood are against this particular development is just in a from a case of nimbyism that's disingenuous none of us are saying that uh if you want to you have two proposals in front of you one looks like a really good idea the other one looks like it

1:32:29 will only benefit one person and that's the developer and that's not smart planning or development and that's not going to make our neighborhood or our uh wider Community better so I would ask that you please focus on the one that makes more sense for everyone involved and not tried to shoehorn something in that is only going to benefit one person thank you very much for your time thank you uh Ken excuse me I hurt my back so it's a little slow take your

1:33:17 time good evening my name is Ken Malden and I live at 3241 fzm Boulevard first I would like to say thank you to those who responded to my email in one email response the council member said they would hate it if the county land around where they lived were developed they would be concerned about the increased traffic parking issues ETC all of the same issues we have brought up but the council member mentioned that they are only allowed to look at the criteria and the facts but in my opinion the biggest fact is not considered as part of the criteria to help make this decision is this annexation in the best interest of the community the local citizens have voiced

1:34:03 that it is not in the best interest of the community the criteria for approval appears to be severely flawed by not taking into the account what the community wants the annexation and development may bring in revenue from property taxes but at the cost cost of the neighboring Community many residents live paycheck to paycheck and with the annexation and development of the property some residents will not be able to afford the increase in property taxes and services forcing some to have to sell their homes because they can no longer afford it the criteria about what is in the best interest of the community and the surrounding neighborhoods should always

1:34:49 be considered even though it's not part of the criteria that you guys are listing thank you thank you Dean ahead I'm Dean Burkhart and my wife Karen burkhard we live at 1244 Del Rose Drive and we're here to talk about a safety issue go ahead Karen I came to talk about a safety issue um of the roundabout on Hayden bridge and harlo Road and having met Brian this evening for the first time and his response before the meeting was that this issue would be taken care of in a

1:35:36 prompt manner uh Karen um has talked about the safety issue with u representatives of Public Works Department for several years and to confirm your recognition that Brian has been taken care of prompt usually the next day after she called this year it didn't and Brian explained and we understand that the reason for this year the delay is the ice storm which affected us all um my background has um in engineering and Karen and I are both Master Gardeners and one of the things that were taught uh as Master Gardeners is right right plant right place so as an

1:36:22 engineer in my job I'm retired now but uh we looked for the root cause and the root cause is not the public works department and especially not Brian the root cause is the um Shrubbery that's there and this is not in the center of the circle or roundabout it's in the beside the roads coming up to it grows Too Fast Too Tall and it really needs to be replaced so um we were here to let you you know if you didn't already know of the problem we use that roundabout basically every day we went through it four times today and uh it's a problem thank you thank you Brandy Hartman

1:37:25 hi you've met me before my name is Brandy Hartman and I actually don't live anywhere near where this problem for pheasant street is the reason I came was I didn't like the idea of of too much going on where I live at out in thirston we were thinking that um low income out where we are at which is far out sod fifth is not really a good idea because they couldn't access and traffic issues but after hearing about pheasant street I was quite disappointed and what people are was going on for those poor people who live there because unfortunately um that strip is extremely small and it's I've driven there I got to see it I have family in the area and friends in the area and I went and checked it out because it was like well how small is this piece of property that they're trying to put a bunch of houses on I've been there twice in the last week um

1:38:10 it's ridiculous are you kidding um even if you put actually I saw it today um there was a trail down it with a car and you can see how a car drove down the middle of it well there's hardly enough room for a car to drive on either side of those two tire marks how are you going to get a a big fir truck down there how's it going to be safe unfortunately I hate to be disrespectful but it is the stupidest idea I've ever seen I know people who live on River Road where this these kind of small little areas go in and there looks great on paper um if we're worried about low income and actually getting the kind of housing we need in Springfield this is not the place to do it there is not enough room to have a driveway that

1:38:57 actually faces you'd have to pull it into the side it's the lack of housing that would actually go in here is ridiculous the amount of how close you'd have to have it to the fences and yeah you're going have to put Windows somewhere even if you put them on the sides they're still looking at people's homes we had this happen by our house when I was growing up um yeah they put them City said it was going to be fine they're not going to look into our properties well the side windows do yes they do it's not going to be good for anyone who lives there nobody wants it the only people who want it are the ones that are going to make money off of it if you want it sorry developer but please take it back to Eugene we're not Eugene we're Springfield there is tons of land in Springfield and a lot of the homes that have been going in and the properties

1:39:42 that have been developed lately none of them except for the one on 28th Street has Apartments the only place I've seen in the last few years of big Mass lower income kind of housing is there the all the other ones I've seen in town I've driven around to look there's hardly any so please this is ridiculous it's just going to make somebody money that's the only reason they want in there it's not about helping people it's not about helping the city getting decent housing there's tons of housing this is just crap I'm sorry to say it but it really is and forcing it in and telling these people it's going to be great for them put it in your neighborhood please not to be rude but please this is I'm sorry but not trying to be mean but honestly

1:40:28 what you're doing is mean sorry but that's my feelings thank you uh Harvest hello my name is Harvest I live at 3325 feasant Avenue and I know that this is not about like any strict facts or anything as the I believe the court attorney or one of the people over here attorney City attorney uh noted um so I don't want to talk too much about that and I'm not super smart so I don't know a lot about facts but I do know like what it feels like to be here and I I

1:41:13 know it doesn't feel good I you guys get to make the decision i' I mean I've only lived at this location for a couple of months now we've recently bought uh I live there with my mom and we recently bought the place but as far as I'm aware I'm not allowed to vote for any of the Ws that are currently making this decision and like that doesn't feel good as far as I'm aware like the people that make the decisions are supposed to represent the people that those decisions impact like I don't know how that's possible and if you're and you are sitting up there and you get to make this decision I would ask you like if you were just like how I asked you last time how would it feel if you were sitting here here how would you think that feels to sit here and not be able to even vote for the people that get to

1:41:58 make this decision for us you also said that this is like a not a normal policy decision and it's a almost like a Judicial decision based off based off a certain criteria and facts and I understand that but if that was the only thing that you were intended to consider why am I even allowed to speak right now like why is why are you making this decision at all why why would why isn't this just some person or a robot in an office checking off the box right and cuz at least I'd like to think somebody really smart probably a lot smarter than me knew that to have this platform to speak and to talk to real people right because humans like to talk to other humans I I I think that's the

1:42:43 reason why I'm getting this platform today and why it should be part of your decision even if it's not the core part of this decision you get to make today or some other day I I I think that it it really should be part of why you consider it and maybe officially that's not anything you're allowed to do but maybe as people you can feel what I'm feeling and what all the people that are here are feeling because normally you know there's not this I imagine there's not this many people that come to these meetings I mean maybe some but probably not a room full and not articles written about it and everything everything that has happened because of this you know it's it's not a smart development

1:43:29 it's not what is best for the city or best for the people and we're here to speak to you about that and uh that's all I got to say thank you thank you that's the last card that I have Neil do we have anybody online does not appear like we have hands online for this item oh we do have one just came up Carrie Bartlett and Carrie should be able to unmute your microphone uh thank you my name is Carrie Bartlett I don't see how I can put my video up so it's just going to be my name um I live at 3107 rallywood Avenue I just purchased uh the house here last year I'm um literally on the corner of game farm and

1:44:15 rallywood and um I noticed a lot of traffic and it sounds as though that was talked about last time in session and fortunately I was out of the state when that session happened um and I would like to just point out that um on Game Farm we have a tremendous amount of fast traffic going down that road uh people may be coming from the hospital or somewhere they're just racing down game farm and if we add another housing area with a tremendous number of cars coming down game farm I think we're going to have an increased um potential for accidents and increased potential for um all kinds of injuries going on in our neighborhood and I just want to point

1:45:00 that out to um everyone and um thank you for your time thank you next item please next item is any business from the city council is there any business or announcements from the council I think we're good next item please the next item is business from the city manager item number one is Community Development block grant substantial amendments and Aaron ffield is here for this

1:45:58 council I'm here tonight for your consideration of a proposed substantial amendments to Prior year Community Development block grant action plans I brought this item first to you during work session on April 22nd and mentioned that the city had previously awarded cdbg funds to Catholic community services of Lane County's Oasis Day Center construction project for homeless families with children that project has experienced delays and is currently not ready to proceed the city is at risk of losing These funds um if they aren't spent quickly and amending these plans would reallocate funds toward projects that we determine are ready to proceed as outlined in your packet the city followed our cdbg public participation process publishing the proposed

1:46:44 amendments for public comment emailing interested parties about the proposal sorry the Community Development advisory committee held a public hearing at their May 29th meeting uh we heard from nine people during public comment and the public hearing So based on um that testimony and the needs identified the committee has recommended um that the city reallocate $47,476 would be repaying our existing section 108 loan of approximately

1:47:29 $165,400 in change um this would allow us to spend cdbg funds immediately while still receiving the loan repayments over the next 5 years the second project would be $259,000 towards supporting a human services delivery system uh the cdac heard from Plaza de nestra commun a newly combined nonprofit of central Latino americ downtown languages and huerto De La Familia Plaza is a latinx serving culturally specific bilingual community service provider in Lane County and has just purchased a building along Mohawk in the Mohawk area to establish a community Wellness Center These funds would go toward uh non-construction costs such as architecture and engineering costs um as

1:48:15 they are renovating their building and finally the third activity about approximately um 4 $663 and I'll say and 65 which is not located in your packet my apologies for those doing the math um but that amount would be to promote economic development through microenterprise business support um also detailed in your packet uh Lane Community College the early child care business accelerator program offers business training and support for new and expanding inhome Child Care businesses in Lane County this funding would provide a grant of $55,000 per grad of this program with an inhome child care business here in Springfield to note um during uh the

1:49:00 public comment period um we also heard from four local lowincome affordable housing providers expressing the need for funds for Capital Improvements um to existing rental projects here in Springfield including roof Replacements duckus HVAC installation and stairc staircase repairs um I will add this part of our ongoing look at cdbg G funding availability we're anticipating about another2 or $300,000 um that may be needed to be reallocated this fall again these may be from projects that are currently not spending down funds as quickly as we anticipated um the cdac is recommending the three projects above for the funding before you tonight but they are also

1:49:45 recommending um that the council um when the time comes um reallocate those additional funds this fall toward the rental rehab project um so that would allow um the city to put out an RFP to solicit asks from existing providers affordable housing development providers um to be able to rehab their existing rental projects um and this would give staff time to issue the RFP but also allow us to put out cdbg cdbg funds quickly on non- construction projects first um so that's what's before you here for questions Joe yes thank you I I please correct me if I'm wrong but we had discussion in

1:50:31 regards to in particular these small quote unquote small business loans for inhome child care of up to $5,000 per incident or per case or whatever it was my understanding that there was not the support for that if and I know I talked to the mayor about this we've had discussions about this and it seems like we wanted to know more in regards to okay what do we expect for an outcome what is what kind of uh accountability is there Etc I I just don't and some of these programs you're describing I don't recall a lot of support for and I'm I'm F I'm puzzled

1:51:17 frankly so for the uh inhome Child Care request um that request uh previously came through the cdbg um fiscal year 25 annual action plan process um the cdac did not recommend funding um it was brought before Council and Council again um prioritized other projects I didn't hear the lack of support for the program what I heard was the priority for um the city's home repair program down payment assistance program um contributions to link County Social Services and Grant Administration um so when went through this process to um amend reallocate prior year funding um sort of the question gets reopened um and uh folks

1:52:04 can comment and that is where uh LCC came in again um and put that request forward um I am not aware of concerns so I'm struggling I guess I'm hearing it For The First Time In This Moment well not hearing support doesn't mean there is support meaning there may be folks that were not supportive of it and then after it was prioritized there was support for that list but that doesn't mean that there was there was support or a green light to go ahead and move forward if there was funding for those other things without further discussion that make sense it doesn't um but I guess what I

1:52:50 can but if it's if it's helpful this is given that this is an entirely sort of new um allocation process this was the city's Community Development advisory committee hearing the needs um through public comment and through the public hearing and from that list making a recommendation to council to move that forward so that is what is before you tonight and and I haven't seen that list so to speak I mean I've seen I see the motion and um the packet there I don't know if you see the packet there's a table um so the table the the column on the far right side um is the proposal to reallocate the funds um and usually we

1:53:37 have discussion in regards to especially in a work session that goes over a different allocation of funding and where that money should go and allows counil to have some input this is a list that says okay this we've got this money this we're the staff and a committee is going to say this is how we're going to spend it and now we're being asked um hey yes we vote on it yes or no and to me that isn't allowing Council to be part of that decision making other than saying no or yes and so I'm I'm really again I'm quite surprised that some of these are on this list that Council hadn't had a a chance to prioritize these as far as even numerically P prioritized on that earlier conversations

1:54:22 during those during those when we're talking about the cdbg funding so or cdac recommendations so that's just that's my that's my comment so Mary you have you Mary you'll have to find someone well you'll have to find either someone else to make that motion or I can make that motion to not adopt let's go Nancy first and then we'll go to Corey um I would just I do recall the council having some discussion around the need for child care and our Community I I don't think that is a necessarily a surprise um I don't uh recall a specific direction from Council but I do uh recall a conversation about it um I think probably the best way to judge interest

1:55:07 among council members is to make a motion and then you can if if the motion is sustained and then you have a discussion in public as a as an elected body and then you call the vote and that's kind of how the sausage is made Cory thank you um and I do recall the um this project coming before us and I know that I have expressed interest in it and support for it I don't remember anyone saying they were not supportive of supporting small businesses and child care in Springfield um I also remember us talking about the repayment piece I remember a very robust conversation that included counselor pisher on that one um

1:55:52 the the one that is new is I think because it is a newly purchased building is the plaza dest communidad piece um and again you know I haven't been on this Council for a hundred years but I have seen repeatedly that we move these things through our committees who then make a recommendation whether it's sedac or the Planning Commission and it goes through this process that comes to us and then we have a discussion and say yes we support it or don't um I for one do support all of these um and would be interested in hearing what other people think all right now that we've got ourselves kind of wrapped around the axle here um I've got questions about some of these I'd like to see a little

1:56:38 bit more information about them I mean obviously from you know from a council perspective if you know people want to vote tonight we can do that but if we've got I don't know what the timeline to get these complete is um like the you know conceptually the build Building looks fine but like the that one and um details around the the child care piece um I know I've seen like a flyer about it at some point um that doesn't mean I haven't seen information I think just getting a little bit more information about it and then revisiting this discussion so that we can kind of figure out what what we would want to do would make would make sense to me uh so mayor I I do have a question on that um maybe director to staff as far as timeline um I think what we were

1:57:23 probably attempting to do is as usual piling everything into the the last of the fiscal year so apologies for that and we uh appreciate your patience so um I will talk to staff about this offline and see if we can find a spot to revisit this in the fall uh Erin is there is there something we would miss or something I would need to do over recess as far as I don't want to hold up other projects that you might be working on I'll say the intent for bringing this forward um was the fact that we have we have nearly half a million dollars in cdbg funds that aren't moving um and are at risk of being taken back by Hud um so I do acknowledge working within trying to

1:58:09 get things in before recess is what has probably squeezed some of this um we did come during work session um to sort of ask the question can we a mend uh the funding from one project to another and we'll go through our process to put a call out um and Council said yes um there was not enough time to put an RFP out um in that sense um and so staff was feeling the non- construction projects were um we've got community Pro Community Partners um that are doing good work that are established in the

1:58:54 community um asking for funds I'm happy to bring more information back um for the July 1 consideration I would say at minimum um if as I heard support for the section 108 payment I would like to move that forward so that we can proceed with getting that payment and being able to move cdbg funds yeah I think we could probably we could probably do that one tonight um I think I think I have questions about the grants just because they're federal dollars right and you know I I think I just want to read it sort like the program sort of Soup To Nuts and just spend a little bit of time of thinking about it and then you know the building

1:59:40 you know again we've done these types of buildings before conceptually you know it makes sense but I just want a little bit more facts and a couple of bullet points on on the paper um Joe thank you m and I I agree I'm not like you know getting stuck in the mud and saying no to all this stuff and and Erin if there's you said program is it 108 or or section 108 or something like that which you just mentioned if that's uh time sensitive and you mention that there is a time constraint with the HUD money then I get it um but I just want to if we can have time like the mayor said to get some information together so we see if we want I would like to see

2:00:25 what other options are out there instead of giving a laundry list saying okay well we got to spend this money and fact is it's still tax money and I don't want to see it just thrown into the wind I want to be able to have some explanation and some more information so um I'm pretty sure I can make a create a motion if you could clarify that Aon with me in regards to that particular program you just mentioned sure I mentioned it um during our April 22 meeting and I'll mention it again tonight so in 2009 um the city accessed what's called a section 108 Loan program through HUD that allowed us to borrow $450,000 on behalf of Nedco in order to help them purchase their downtown building and in return they put four

2:01:11 units of low-income qualified housing above um since then Nedco has been paying back that loan to the city um twice a year and and we've been taking those loan repayments and sending them on to HUD to satisfy that loan there are five more years on that loan um we have the option to use our cdbg funds in order to pay off that loan right now we would continue to receive those loan repayments though from Nedco to fully satisfy the loan got it I'm sorry go ahead mayor so Joe before you before you try to form that into a motion I want to just make sure I call see if anybody else has a comment that they want to make because

2:01:56 before we get too carried away here is it anybody else have questions or comments um okay can can I just sure before um I guess what I heard from councelor pisher right now is wanting to know quote unquote what else is out there um and that I think gives me pause um we did follow the city's adopted public participation process here in terms of allowing for 30 days for the public to comment and holding a public hearing to receive input um so I yeah I maybe I'll work with the city manager to figure out if there's something further there um but I'm also happy to provide more information about what has been provided and who did testify and what that information was um I think that is where I'd like to focus my energy but

2:02:42 welcome to um input I completely understand Erin and apologize for putting you all through this but I just need I mean as as you know me well enough to know that I want to be comfortable where I make I make decisions and I'm not into a waste of taxpayer monies and I want accountability and that's my fiduciary responsibility and I really take it very seriously but I do not want to be a stick in the mud or or or a baton in the spokes to stop things I don't want things to get messed up because of me not being good with with voting but um so I would be happy maybe with uh with help of the City attorney to quickly maybe formulate some sort motion that makes sure that Sean you have you have about uh 15

2:03:30 or 30 seconds because Corey had a comment she wanted to jump in for she's really buying you time is that is that what I'm doing um I think uh and I appreciate you opening up for other comments because I think a couple of things one we don't always do such a great job of tracking what we've talked about and things that have come before us and I appreciate ain's um diplomacy and reminding us that we've had the conversations about it and that the information has been in places and imp packet so I think there's that I think the other thing that I'm feeling is when you open it up for other comments it it's really Joe has an opinion I have an opinion and maybe you have a middle opinion and so I think that it's if I

2:04:15 was sitting in Aaron shoes and this is me just being really speculative I'd be like I still don't know what the direction is to go with this right um and also to just one of the things and and I'm feeling a little bit cranky is that we have processes that we use and then sometimes we say we don't like that process and then other times we say we want to use those processes so that's the piece for me that's like if we have a process and we put people and we put staff and we say we're going to do this process and then it comes and we like well we don't necessarily like it or we weren't paying attention we want to do something different so I think think that we have to stick with our processes and I will take them in point um I think from my perspective the

2:05:02 direction would be move forward the loan which we I think we all can agree that we do tonight and just bring just bring more information back right I know we've talked about some of these projects at some point but like seeing a refresher on what they are where they came from some of the feedback from the committee and just getting curious about the discuss that's happened so far um would would be would would be helpful because if we rewound the way that my memory uh is that I I think I have questions about whether or not Grant programs well I shouldn't even ask my question I don't know enough about this program to really feel like comfortable forming an opinion yet that and we should we should just leave it about

2:05:47 that because I I just simply we need some more information Victoria so I'm just trying to understand Erin um on the different um bullet points that we have here is the I think what is it the one two third one down which says that the uh accessibility bathrooms at City Hall is that part of what would have been approved tonight with this because that also seems like an important thing I good question um so that is part of um including what was part of the public comment period so listing it um the um talked to City staff we did not receive any detailed information about it and then during the CD the cdc's

2:06:32 discussion they did not recommend it so it did not it would not have been um included but it's your decision tonight of just including it to say it got brought up yeah I'm just looking at that and thinking that's something that's a longterm like something that could really make a positive effect on our community and accessibility for people with disabilities in City Hall I know having a mom that had was in a wheelchair for many years and not being able to go a lot of places that's a pretty big deal especially being able to access their government um and so um so they so they um wanted to do the um Early Childhood care accelerator program and the plaza day new new nestra Plaza

2:07:19 and and then also the um the 108 loan yeah and I I will add um and I um I'm realizing as I'm reading through the packet is not here um or it's mentioned briefly um is the commentary about the rental rehab for um existing income qualified affordable housing rental developments um and if I'm if I'm recalling councelor ponary that is what I'm remembering you and councelor Doyle sort of acknowledging to say hey if there's sort of neighborhood improvements that could be made we um that is something we would like to forward exactly correct and that was a discussion that happened at the committee and sort of seeing all of this need their recommendation is that the

2:08:06 funding that'll come be made available in the fall um to prioritize that um to prioritize uh that project for that later funding um I will say I probably maybe didn't stress it here but certainly stress it the cdac that we are here to discuss this like how can we move these this funding forward quickly um and so I think they took that and sort of looking at the timing it takes to RFP out and sort of conduct the environmental review and then move forward with Contracting on a construction project is more intensive and say let's move that later and let's get the funding out for projects that could use them now um I am recognizing there was information provided to the cdac that was not include this included

2:08:52 in this packet about those projects that they um were discussing so to your point mayor um yes I I hear you and I I'm thinking about the future but um I am curious would July 1 be amenable to bring this back to you with that additional or we talk well hopefully we will we will try to figure out how to get it in July one um Nancy has the ability this time of year to somehow make time which I think is a marketable skill for city managers Nancy did you have something to add just really quick um to councelor pisser's question about a motion that he could put forward that we could something we could knock out tonight oh looks like great so uh Christina sent that I was I was just GNA say you could use um page three of4 the first bullet item is is um the one that

2:09:39 pertains to HUD in the Section 8 one um excuse me the section 108 loan um and that can be fairly simple but I'm sure the City attorney made it more complicated I just recommend that you um you can I sent it to Allison who hopefully could put it in the I don't have access to the zoom chat but could potentially send that or display it on screen but um I would recommend that you just use the motion that's in the packet with the caveat of um moving to approve the proposed substantial amendments to the Community Development block grant fiscal year 2022 act annual action plan and the amount of and that amount that's in the packet for 2022 and fiscal year 2023 annual auction plan in the amount of um

2:10:28 $148,000 $2 to increase supply of affordable housing and authorize city manager to execute all those documents I do want to be a little more precise with this motion because it relates to Federal HUD funding and they generally like to see specific motions Cil they always seem very precise do we have a Alison do we have something oh we we're going to pause for station identification and see if we can get it up there so that Council pisher can it and I don't yeah and I don't believe there's chat function on this so we'll have to do it up on the screen I sent it to you in teams sorry you sent it to me or no um they're working it out Joe okay I'll just stand by thank you sorry I appreciate everybody's patience with

2:11:13 this you can tell by 8:30 we get a little bit more Punchy around here the other option is I could read the motion and then a member of the council if they agree with that could say so moved if that would be quicker so the motion would be to approve the proposed substantial amendments to the Community Development block grant fiscal year 2022 annual action plan in the amount of $ 17,42 35 and fiscal year 2023 annual action plan in the amount of $148,000 and2 to increase the supply of affordable housing and authorize the city manager to execute all documents needed to give effect to the city's agreement with the US Department of Housing and Urban Development for these funds so moved second you could you call the vote

2:12:00 please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor Bradley yes councelor Blackwell yes councelor Doyle I think so yes and councelor pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS next item please next item under business from the city manager is annexation of territory to the City of Springfield Annex 2.34 Acres of residential property located at map 17-32 2-13 tax slot 20801 and map 17- 0322 D12 tax slot 0210 and concurrently Annex a secondment

2:12:45 of Game Farm Road and pheasant Boulevard um Tom sers is here for this item all right before you go I've got uh some additional comments introducing the item now is the time in the agenda for the council to conduct a second reading on the proposed Annex approximately 2.3 Acres of property in the area of Game Farm Road uh in phant Boulevard in adjacent segments of of streets of the RightWay the council conducted a public hearing on this matter on June 3rd 2024 and the council closed the hearing and written record because this is a land use application the council can only consider information submitted into the record at or before the hearing was closed as a council we've received several emails from interested people after the record was closed and we've

2:13:30 heard additional testimony during the business business from the audience I'm going to turn it over to the assistant City attorney to explain our options regarding these comments thank you mayor I'm going to um give an overview of the uh emails you received outside of the public comment period um and some brief analysis on um really identifying that those are concerns that have already been raised are already in the record and addressed in the staff report findings and then um also identify for you some of the issues raised that are not relevant to criteria of approval for the annexation so first there was a June 12th email from Aaliyah a beta and I apologize in advance for any mispronunciations um that included a petition of residents in the area opposing the annexation this email

2:14:16 raised many issues that were already raised by area residents during the public hearing process on June third including privacy concerns Traffic Safety environmental concerns solar setbacks and historic resources these issues were identified in the record and have been responded to in the findings from staff in the updated staff report that Tom will present in a moment other issues con um for example crime that may originate with new H with new housing and jurisdictional concerns regarding City authority over annexations are not relevant to the criteria of approval for annexations although these issues were also raised on the June 3rd hearing there was was a June 13th email from B James which raised General neighborhood opposition and generalized concerns regarding infrastructure infrastructure to serve the site to the level required

2:15:02 for an annexation approval is addressed in the staff report and findings under state law the city cannot deny an annexation application or Housing Development proposal on the basis of neighborhood opposition or effect on property values these issues are not relevant to the criteria of approval I'm aware of at least um one counsel response to this public comment that was sent via email I reviewed the substance of that response and it was to reiterate that the council must base its decisions on criteria of approval and that the decision must be unbiased which is accurate the response did not include any information not already in the record of the annexation um and did not include anything irrelevant to the criteria of approval there was a June 15th email

2:15:47 from Ken Malden and this issue uh raised an issue related to the location of a fence between the um resident's property and the proposed annexation area this is a um private property line dispute that is a civil matter that the city does not take any action in either in the annexation approval process or outside of that during the development review process it is not relevant to criteria of approval for annexations and then additionally tonight you heard um I'm G to break this down into sort of four themes um sorry five themes of what you heard most of the comments first were restating issues raised on June 3 and these have been addressed in the staff report similar to those issues raised in the

2:16:33 petition some comments you heard tonight Express disagreement with the proposed findings based on evidence that's already in the record the council can feel free to ask staff questions related to the proposed findings before you make your decision but those questions and your findings should be based on testimony subm honor before June 3rd and not specifically on disagreement with those findings that you heard tonight second there were several references to the petition submitted on June 12th and general lack of public support again neighborhood support or opposition is not a criteria of approval for annexations to the City of Springfield the purpose of holding the public hearing is to solicit public input on the criteria of approval and whether the property for example can be served with the key minimum Urban

2:17:19 facilities and services not to gain uh uh collect remonstrances against the annexation or disagreement or disapproval or approval um of the annexation based on other factors you heard General comments taking issue with the criteria of approval as not being appropriate um criteria to apply you must apply the criteria that apply to this annexation tonight but in your legislative role outside of a specific application you do have authority to ask questions about criteria of approval um to explore what those criteria ought to be they must be consistent with Statewide planning rules um and one of those is that we maintain an adequate supply of developable property for housing needs in our community and we do

2:18:04 have a deficit of um housing in our community there was uh comments that infrastructure would be easier or less costly to provide in other locations or skepticism of whether the city's development criteria of approval could be met in the future these are also not relevant to the criteria for annexations the criteria looks at whether the key Urban facilities and services at a minimum level can be provided to the property in a timely orderly and efficient manner and those that is the only criteria around in providing infrastructure it does not look at whether it's more costly to provide it in this location than another location also does not look at whether specific

2:18:50 development standards can be met at a later time as long as minimum Urban facilities and services can be provided and then last there were um issues raised that were similar to the June 3D hearing that are not relevant to criteria of approval um that are also addressed in the staff report as irrelevant such as noise concerns from surrounding new residential property impacts on property values and jurisdictional concerns with County versus City representation so my recommendation to the council tonight is that that you um specifically exclude the testimony you heard tonight from your consideration again most of what was shared is already reflected in the record and open to council consideration because it was shared on June 3rd and in written

2:19:35 comments submitted June 3r and the remainder of the testimony is not relevant to the specific criteria of approval for annexations which you're obligated to make your decision based off of are there any questions for me about that explanation are there any question s all right have any counselors had other contacts contacts about this application outside of the public Hearing in written record so what would be expar contact and we'll go down by award order Michelle no xparte communication no expart communication uh I was contacted by Mr gansen by telephone and I did speak with

2:20:21 him after the June 3r so I would recommend that um you either confirm that that information is um already in the record of the application from Mr gansen or um that it you will not consider it in your decision tonight I will not consider it's already in the record actually can I just say what it absolutely he asked me if it would be worth it to write a letter to the council and I told him that would be at his discretion okay thank you um I it was already brought up uh the letter or the response that I had to be and then I also responded to Ken similarly it will not affect my decision it was clarification

2:21:10 contact I've had exp parte contact with Council uh commissioner level he asked about the status of this hearing and I shared the basic facts of when we were when we were REM uh continuing this meeting tonight with him yes sorry I did actually speak with commissioner LEL as well um it does not impact my decision tonight I think that General Communications with other elected officials about the process or the status of the hearing um are not about the merits of the application would not be considered exper contacts yeah and I will confirm it was not about any of the merits of the application it was more timing and some of the facts around it at this time the council is excluding from the record all testimony that was submitted to us in writing after June

2:21:55 3rd or in tonight's public tonight during business from the audience the written record and public hearing remain closed and the council will not consider any testimony in making its decision on the application the council will consider all comments and testimony that were provided at the public hearing and before the record was closed and responses to those comments that are included in the staff report and findings Tom sver senior planner will now provide us with a report on the updated findings Tom thank you mayor good evening I am Tom sers again with the uh current planning section we're here tonight for the second reading of an ordinance to Annex an approximately 2.34 acre area that includes two tax

2:22:40 Lots in North West Springfield along with two segments of public rideway we get the sorry uh um you'll be hearing about the updated information in the staff report that resulted from the prior hearing and public testimony just going to pause for a moment for the

2:23:51 wa as you may recall all the proposed annexation area is highlighted in yellow and consists of two tax slots and two segments of pheasant Boulevard and Game Farm Road um much of the testimony on June 3D spoke to the Future development plans of the site which I have briefly addressed in the staff report but will not be speaking to tonight as it does not have bearing on the annexation approval criteria however there are some points of testimony that address the approval criteria which I will speak to in order to illuminate Council uh first there was a comment claiming that the property is not contiguous to the city limits staff believes the comment was referring to the proposed private Street as not being contiguous to the city limits um as can be seen on this slide

2:24:38 though the boundaries of the annexation area are clearly AB budding and contiguous to the city limits next there was testimony expressing concerns about the one-way circulation and and emergency access to the site as can be seen on this Slide the closest fire station is station number five located approximately 1,800 ft south of the annexation area staff had further conversations with fire Marshall's office where they confirmed that both the location of the fire station and the pro proposed private Street width is sufficient for emergency response and also that the emergency apparatus would not have to abide by the one-way flow of traffic that it could access it in two two directions

2:25:26 lastly uh one residence's testimony referred to uh the 1992 Gateway refinement plan this property is in fact in the Gateway refinement plan which I will continue to refer to as the grp just for uh brevity however as detailed in the staff report there are no limiting or otherwise prohibitive criteria that would prevent this annexation or future development from taking place on subject site I will speak to each point made by the testimony on the goals and policies of the grp first point maintain the live livability and quality of existing residential neighborhoods as new development occurs this is goal seven of the community and economic development element on page eight of the grp the

2:26:13 goals of this element intend to balance the refinement plan areas's needs with those of the larger Springfield and Metropolitan Community as the area experienced transition from rural to Urban conditions its importance to generating jobs the regional significance of its commercial and Industrial resources and the need to preserve key assets and features that are intrinsic to a high quality of life the goals predominantly refer to economic growth and development in the grp area for which these goals intend to buffer the residential neighborhoods from economic development in this context goal 7's intent is to buffer the residential neighborhoods from Economic Development not further residential development second point quote ensure

2:27:01 efficient and Safe Transportation Systems in and around residential areas promote walking and bicycling as alternative modes of travel by providing pathway connections between residential areas and other important destinations end quote this is goal eight of the residential element on page nine of the grp staff and Associated outside agencies have taken every necessary measure to ensure this goal is met especially as it relates to the safe functioning of intersections where most Transportation conflicts arise much of the public testimony surrounded the lack of space for sidewalks in the future development and the inability to promote safe walking and bicycling on surrounding streets while this is a matter to be fully reviewed in a development application the concept thus far

2:27:47 includes a private roadway built to Urban standards with sidewalk on the north side of the proposed Street and as it concerns surrounding streets the city is in discussions with Lan County to explore the transition of County Roads to Urban Roads as development occurs and improvements are made to the existing Transportation infrastructure to bring them into compliance with Urban standards third point the historic resources element of the grp identified historic features throughout the refinement plan area it should be noted that this section of Railway is is not listed in the adopted City of Springfield Historic Landmark inventory for the purposes of the refinement plan only significant historic resources are classified as significant G five

2:28:34 historic resources as designated by the state next slide please the historic resources survey listing located on page 40 of the grp lists the abandoned Southern Pacific Railroad spur Resource number 11 highlighted on that page as a contributing historic resource not a significant G five historic resource policy 2 encourages on-site retention of significant go five historic resources however it states that moving structures is allowed in this case and being that it is not a significant go structure all rail infrastructure was removed more than 40 years ago prior to the creation of the grp the policies largely apply to

2:29:20 significant go five historic resources even so they do not call for outright preservation uh but encourage retention of the resources and representation via commemorative plaques or similar methods of memorialization when a historic resource cannot be retained policy 3 established that the historical coordinator shall explore the feasibility of and funding for the installation of commemorative plaques marking three sites one of which is the southern paic Pacific Rail Corridor I walked the segment of former railroad last week from its Terminus at the LTD station on South a uh to the roundabout on harlo road and did not find an existing plaque so as staff lays

2:30:05 on to the historic commission I will present this matter to the commission to take the necessary steps in commemoration of the site fourth point quote mitigate adverse impacts of public facilities on residential areas the is policy 17 of the residential element as found on page 15 of the grp policy 17.1 identifies the requirement to buffer quote future electrical substations roads fire stations and sanitary and storm sewer facilities end quote from residential areas to the extent reasonably practicable the proposed annexation area does not involve or require the types of public facilities listed in policy 7 .1

2:30:51 therefore this policy is not applicable to the proposed annexation lastly this was not a goal brought up during testimony but it is a pertinent goal of the grp to address the testimony on environmental concerns and that is goal six of the residential element which states to quote minimize adverse environmental impacts of residential development and to integrate natural assets into residential development planning to the maximum extent possible end quote there are are no significant natural resources under goal six located on the subject site public testimony surrounded potential contamination in the soil from the operation of the rail spur and a concern that development of this site would create an adverse environmental impact due to disturbing the soil during

2:31:38 construction staff consulted the Environmental Protection agencies EPA interactive map and virro Atlas as has been brought up in a further testimony here uh to review the subject site for Brownfield status hazardous waste sites both active and inactive superf fund sites and the Toxic release inventory no data was returned on or near this site that would indicate it is contaminated staff further consulted the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality DEQ for any local listings of Brownfield or otherwise contaminated sites and also did not find any such records thus the information available indicates that there will not be adverse impacts environmental impacts on future

2:32:24 development as a result of this annexation next slide staff did find an EPA publication on the Redevelopment of rail properties these being Rail Yards rail Fields places that are more heavily contaminated it is evident that entire Rail Yards with significant contamination are able to be redeveloped for residential use and these properties go through a remediation process to to clean them up even if there was contamination present on the segment of abandoned railroad it could effectively be cleaned prior to development now I would like to address some further topics that have not yet been discussed the code does not contain solar exposure standards for private development rather there is a section of

2:33:10 code that pertains to solar access protection namely SDC 5.18.12 and is available to all residents who seek protections from vegetation and or development that would block the Sun and who plan to have solar panels installed on their home and application can be filed with planning department to ensure that sunlight reaches any proposed or existing solar panels next it was said that the property is being annexed for City of Springfield use that is not true is being annexed into the city but remains in private ownership furthermore it was mentioned that because the property is annexed it would preclude the surrounding Property Owners from having the ability to purchase the property this is also not true even after

2:33:55 annexation the surrounding neighbors still have the potential to approach the owner and collectively purchase the property another point that was raised surrounded the potential to develop the site in a ra Rails to Trails format or public land in the Park District this is not possible because land is under private ownership and that owner has different development plans for the site Rails to Trails Ty Ally converts existing rail systems into trails and will amalan ultimately did not purchase the property at the time of auction Slide the grp references to the abandoned rail spur actually apply to the en entire Southern Pacific Railway line here in town not just the privately owned portion and indeed there have been

2:34:42 large sections in the public ride of way that have already been preserved for public use such as The Pedestrian path on Pioneer Parkway lastly and this is the final lastly the annexation process has repeatedly been referred to as a checkbox process this is simply not true on the surface reciting the annexation approval criteria in a public hearing format may seem concise into the point but that is because it is the culmination of months of analysis and preparation that staff and many other agencies conduct well before the public hearing we have a checkbox process for type 1 applications that never see a public hearing and are not noticed out to the community for input because they are very minor in nature and receive an in-house

2:35:29 approval this is not the case with annexations as type three procedures are typically a more rigorous review process that staff conducts and it's prec precisely why we are here tonight in front of you so based on the updated information and because all applicable annexation criteria have have been satisfied staff recommends that this application be considered for approval by Council thank you all and I'm here for any questions you have are there any questions for Tom Michelle comments first but U then just a couple questions I just for clarifications um I you know I hear all of the concerns that have been shared I I empathize with

2:36:16 every single one of them you know there are a lot of neighborhoods in Springfield that have these same struggles when we approve annexations um I was really honestly hoping for a reason to to deny this one but as we've all heard um they meet the you know it meets the criteria for approval um with that said I do have just a couple of questions just want to clarify for future um development the development piece um relation to the soil concerns during the development process will we require environmental reports there are no mechanisms that we can legally require the private property

2:37:03 owner to provide um anything that would be uh otherwise not listed in the code to be provided for an application okay just I just want to get some of this out and clarify it for folks um so with the amount of public opposition to the Future development on this site are there options available to council to stay informed provide feedback as we work through that process or is that is that at a staff level um we have an option to uh through the director to elevate a application to a higher level um I'm not sure um and you know we are not at that point yet so I I

2:37:50 dare not speculate hey Tom we're gonna have Mark come and help with with some of these questions I see him rumbling buff thank you mayor and Council for the record Mark Rust uh planning manager and I know Christina I think was about to weigh in as well that there is language and a process in our code to allow the director to elevate an application from a type two which would be the staff level decision to a public heing which would be at the uh Planning Commission unfortunately based on some new state law that was passed for housing specifically we cannot use that in a housing application if it's a clear and objective um process if the developer

2:38:36 were to opt into or choose a discretionary approval process then that would elevate it but unfortunately with all the new middle housing regulations and just housing in general um were required to improve housing based on clear objective standards so it would just be a staff level decision okay great thank you I just wanted to get that out there and make sure we all understood that thank questions mayor I'd like to make a motion to adopt an ordinance annexing certain territory 3333 feasant Boulevard and vacant lot at map 17 -3-

2:39:22 22-13 tax slot 20801 and approximately a 230 foot long segment of Game Farm Road and an approximately 135 foot long segment of pheasant Boulevard to the City of Springfield and withdrawing the same territory from the rainbow water district and the Willakenzie rural Fire Protection District adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date second Neil could you call the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes but I don't like it Council rodley yes coun councelor Blackwell yes councelor Doyle I and councel pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero

2:40:09 Nos and we'll give you guys just a minute if you're per perfectly welcome to stay or if you want to go well I can't bear I I I will be I will be I will be more than happy to answer your question when when we're done we can't respond here thank you next item please next item is business from the city attorney item number one is amendment to the city council operating policies and procedures and uh Christina K is here for this

2:41:06 item I'll make eye contact from a different angle this time um I'm here tonight for Mary Bridget um City attorney to um just present to you the annual resolution adopting your new Council operating policies and procedures you reviewed these in a work session on May 20th and um the council considered some proposed changes um specifically Council attendance updating language involving counsel attendance at Council meetings uh agenda and supportive material to the public removing outdated section about providing the media with meeting materials um adding flexibility in scheduling the enactment of ordinances so that they don't have to be adopted at um subsequent back-to-back meetings but could allow more time for changes and response to council direction or public comment and then rewriting of the of

2:41:53 section nine on boards commissions and committees to incorporate changes from the 2023 Council Retreat um the council operating policies and procedures require a two-thirds vote of the councilors who are present which is uh all of you um for approval any questions Victoria I was told this is the time for me to bring up something that might have to do with this because um regarding counselor pay and the potential of seeing that on a ballot in the near future it's probably not the greatest time since we're not exactly the most popular right now in this room after that vote but um I I think a lot of people don't understand that we read basically war in peace every single

2:42:38 weekend and spend every single Monday here so people show up for twice in a month but we do this every single day not to mention our committees and what have you and so it's it's time that we start seeing some comp ation I'd like to see how we process that so a um change to the counsel compensation would require a charter Amendment which must be approved by voters um I think that the next step in that would be some uh one of the options is for the mayor to propose uh some kind of assemble some kind of committee to take a look at that um but more importantly I think there are because compensation raises a potential conflict of of Interest issue with counselors um if you're making decisions on your own compensation then we have to take specific steps um

2:43:24 following guidance from the Oregon government ethics commission to make sure that that's done in a way that is ethically appropriate and um so I think the next step would likely be for city attorney's office to just provide some guidance on what next steps could look like um to the council for follow up on that discussion but it couldn't be implemented through your operating policies and procedures anyway yeah could you get us some more information I know there's been some interest about that and I'm more than happy to appoint a committee related to have a deeper conversation but if you could discuss it and get get us some more get back to us that'd be great and I'm sorry but I'd like that to happen sooner rather than later I've been bringing this up for a year and it just keeps getting kicked down the road and I keep being told we can't do it this last time because we're doing a bond and we can't do it this time and so I'm I'm really frustrated

2:44:10 with not hearing an answer so yeah so let let them get the ethics information back I hear you um I know I there a specific reason that I told you to bring it up at this time so we brought it up let the City attorney get us some more more information about it so that's actually kicking the ball ball down the road so the uh the process is started but I hear you about the timing all right mayor I'd like to make a motion to adopt a resolution adopting amendments to this Council operating policies and procedures second Neil could you call a vote please yeah yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councelor rodley yes councelor Blackwell yes

2:44:55 councelor Doyle I and Council pisher yes thank you motion passes six yeses zero NOS any other business any other I'm sorry I missed any other business from the city manager no further business any further Business from The City attorney okay all right we are wrapped um and I'm going toj the meeting thank you everybody have a good night