Springfield City Council — September 16, 2024

0:04 I'm going to call the C city council Springfield City Council work session to order with roll call Mayor Van Gordon here councelor Weber here councelor Mo here councelor Rothe here councelor Blackwell here councelor Doyle here and councelor pisher here thank you thank you we have two work session items this evening the first is the Springfield development code amendments annexations come on up Haley

0:58 okay good evening uh City councilors and mayor um thank you for attending this work session to discuss the Springfield development code amendments for annexations uh in a minute I'll start the presentation uh I've set aside 20 to 30 minutes for Q&A with all of you um but if at any time during the presentation you want me to stop and discuss it um let's go from there so why is the annexation section of the Springfield development code changing the project would amend the annexation section of of the Springfield development code in an effort to enable efficient timely review that aligns with state law the Amendments will clarify the application and initiation types it amends Springfield development code

1:44 5.7.1 125 for initiation method requirements and application requirements to clarify what documents are required for the various annexation applications it improves efficiency and timeliness for staff and officials to process applications and make a decision changes to Springfield development code 5.7.1 15 review provide an option where an annexation does not require but may go to a public hearing and it removes redundant terms in Springfield development code 5.7.1 13 and addresses appropriate processes in Springfield development code 5.7.1 15

2:33 you may be asking yourself what exactly is annexation annexation is the process by which properties outside the city limits become incorporated into the City and thus can receive city services the Springfield City Council makes the decision whether to approve an annexation request if approved the uf1 or urbaniza Fringe overlay zoning District no longer applies for example if your property is currently zoned R1 uf101 once annexed it will be zoned R1 some service providers also change upon annexation for example if the annexation area is within a water supply District or rural fire district the city will process a request to withdraw the annexing territory from the water district or fire district if the

3:19 property is not already within the waman Park and Recreation District's service boundary it will be annexed into the district at the same time the property is annexed into the city some brief history about annexation in Springfield from 1864 to 1960 the city did not expand beyond the area bounded by Main Street Q Street 28th Street and Kelly but in 1960 Springfield annexed thirst to the east the area had no paved streets sewers or storm drains the 1960 annexation was appealed the court found that it was reasonable given the pressure for new hom sites sewers and police protection during the 1970s another spr

4:05 of annexations added another two square miles Springfield has not actively annexed property since the 1970s annexation was and is driven by Property Owners request to be included within the city limits and where the minimum level of services can be provided the first topic we're going to talk about tonight clarifies that the the three main types of initiation methods for annexation they are shown on the screen as owner consent triple majority and double majority in the code to understand the differences between the types consider that an owner consent annexation is when all of the owners and not less than half of the electors consent to an

4:50 annexation a triple majority is when more than half the owners who also own more than half the land in the contiguous a ter territory and represent more than half of the assessed value of the property consent to the annexation a double majority is when a majority of the electors and owners more than half the land consent to the annexation note that city council May initiate annexation of public rideway or other public land contiguous to the city limits by resolution topic two covers Springfield development code 5.7.1 15 annexation review this section was amended by adding an owner consent annexation which does not require a public hearing unless Council chooses to

5:37 defer action until after holding a public hearing including a review process for double majority and triple majority annexation applications and for consistency and Clarity moving the recommendation to city council and appeals process to this section as they are part of the review process on the topic of of public hearings there is a difference between the current code requirements and the minimum state requirements for public hearings in the current code practically everything goes to a public hearing because nothing meets the exception in the code the code requires a city council public hearing for annexations with an exception in one narrow context a single Lotter parcel adjacent to the

6:22 city limits and city services and not dividable by a partition or subdivision the reduction in minimum lot size changes made during previous phases of the development code update project make the Clause not dividable by partition or subdivision less applicable than before the minimum state requirements for hearings on the other hand require a public hearing for double majority and triple majority annexations no public hearing is required for owner consent annexations so the first option we're going to talk about tonight um option 1 a in your Council briefing memo um is for no hearing for owner consent annexations at the work session with the Planning Commission on July 2nd 2024 and

7:09 workshops with the public on July 17th and 18th staff proposed an option for no hearings for owner consent annexations note that although not required by state law it included an OP it included an option for the director and our councel to call for a public hearing for owner consent annexations of the 13 annexations submitted between 2023 and 2024 eight were initiated using the owner consent method the option of no public hearing for owner consent annexations could significantly reduce the number of annexations that go to a public hearing the next option option 1B would stipulate that there are no hearings for owner consent annexations unless

7:54 property includes natural resources or natural hazards certain areas and District dists could impede a property from being adequately served by water sewer storm water drainage or streets at the time that development is complete the city could require a public hearing for owner consent annexations when the property is in the hillside overlay District the flood plane overlay District the property includes a water quality limited water course locally significant Wetland or riparian area half of the annexation application submitted to the city during 2020 3 to 2024 included natural resources or areas with natural hazards five of the eight owner consent annexations did include natural

8:39 resources or areas with natural hazards so they would have required a public hearing under this proposal if Council elects to place the least restrictions on owner consent annexations under option 1 a which we just talked about but wishes to hold a public hearing for areas where there are natural resources or natural hazards option 1B could be included in the materials presented at the city council public hearing following the workshops and Planning Commission public hearing no comments were provided regarding this option the next option 2A uh adds an option where no public hearing is required for owner consent

9:24 initiated annexations on a single lot or parcel zoned R1 and designated ldr that is less than 10,000 square ft and served by a faing septic after reviewing annexations submitted to the city during 2023 to 2024 only one application had a failing septic but it was not an owner consent annexation the proposed code Amendment showed an attachment to in your packet tonight Incorporated the planning commission's recommendation which is this that's shown on the screen recognizing that that this option limits annexations that do not go to a public hearing to a select view staff is proposing to amend the proposed code amendments to incorp incorporate option

10:19 2B the next option to be uh another alternative to the proposed code would add an option where no public hearing is required for owner consent initiated annexations on a single lud parcel zoned R1 and designated ldr that is less than 10,000 sare ft or for territory with a fine septic as noted on the previous slide only one annexation submitted to the city during 2023 to 2024 had a failing septic but it was not an owner consent annexation however the gis Department was consulted to determine what percentage of properties within the ugb and within 300 ft of City Wastewater are under 10,000 square ft roughly 42% of properties under the proposed criteria could be annexed to

11:04 the city without a public hearing this alternative minimally amends the planning commission's recommended code amendments to include not only properties in the R1 District that are less than 10,000 square ft from requiring a public hearing when they are owner consent initiated annexations but all owner consent initiated annexation properties with a failing septic this option will allow more annexations to not go to a public hearing but not as many as allowing all owner consent initiated annexations to not go to a public hearing and as less limiting than the proposed legislative code in option 2A topic three is about Springfield development code 5.7.1 125 annexation initiation and

11:52 application submitt this section was amended by breaking down the initiation method and application requirements by application type pursuant to either owner consent double majority or triple majority topic four is about the public hearing requirements in Springfield development code 5.7.1 30 under the current code notice of a public hearing is mailed at least 14 days prior to the public hearing to match the notice requirements for a quasi judicial land use decision the notice requirements were changed to 21 days in the city council briefing memo you will note that we also discuss the options for public hearing notice in the code the minimum requirement in state

12:39 law according to 97.79 72 for a local quasi judicial land use hearing requires that notice of the hearing is provided to the applicant and to owners of property within the within 100 ft of the subject property to be annexed where the property is wholly or impart within an urban growth boundary this option reduces overhead cost to applicants and the City by amending the notice requirements to include only owners of properties located within 100 ft of the perimeter of a property to be annexed the section second option keeps the notice requirements as they are written in the existing code under stdc 5.7.1 30 that notice of a public hearing

13:25 is mailed to owners and occupants of properties located within 300 ft of the perimeter of the property to be annexed the third option could amend who owners and occupants or just owners and from what distance minim a minimum of 100 feet to 300 or more feet notice is given in response to public comment received the existing code standards for notices that includes property owners and occupants within 300 ft of the property has been retained at the August 6th 2024 Planning Commission public hearing one of the planning Commissioners questioned the necessity of informing both owners and occupants since the owners carry the

14:10 liability for their property and should be responsible for informing their tenants other planning Commissioners sided with informing both owners and occupants to minimize to maximize the transparency and Community engagement throughout the annexation process topic five what standards were not changed in these code amendments the criteria for approval in Springfield development code 5.7.1 140 the zoning section in 5.7.1 15 unincorporated land within the ugb is distinguished from Land within the city limits by the addition of the Urban Fringe overlay District or uf1 the uf1 overlay district will continue to

14:56 cease to apply and the current zoning will apply when annexation approval is granted and that annexation is voluntary the amendments to the development code are subject to a set of approval criteria noted here on the screen based on the staff report and findings the code amendments are in conformance with the metro plan and Springfield comprehensive plan are consistent with applicable State statutes and are consistent with applicable Statewide planning goals and admitted rative rules thus the applicable approval criteria are met so what are the next steps this request is reviewed as a type four

15:41 legislative Amendment to the Springfield development code which requires review and a recommendation by the Planning Commission and ultimately adoption by the city council the Springfield Planning Commission issued a recommendation on August 6th 2024 and the next step after this work session is a public hearing on October 7th that's the end of my presentation any questions sure she does go ahead Steve we talk about tenants Property Owners tenants vote property owners don't necessarily vot they some live someplace else and sometimes we get into a problem there such as that Main Street Cy project that

16:27 came up that we didn't know the part the owners only the tenants and so it's sech being a problem in some cases anybody else go ahead Victor hey thank you so much for the presentation I spent a lot of time going over this I read every every piece of it on Saturday that's my my fun for the Saturday afternoon and um although I can appreciate the planning commission's recommendation I don't agree I think that we should go with onea um and I think that we should go with option one um that's my opinion by what not only um what we've seen um consistently um

17:12 throughout being on Council and otherwise um the types of public comment that we receive are rarely um related to the actual code of annexation and I think that even if people understand that they still want to um to have them to to have a say about it and and the reality is is that we're we're living in a time where we have to develop and everybody's fine with development right up until it comes into their neighborhood and then they don't want it there and I think that we have to realize that development is going to occur um and to to Simply um reduce this to just being annexations um that have to do with bad septics we saw that only one of those in this last year were that

17:58 so so um I appreciate that people want to have input but I think that it also needs to come into account what it's costing the city what it's costing the person who's applying and really the time and energy that the that the folks are putting in because um they they not only feel like maybe they're not heard if we do this but then they're feeling like they're heard and we don't do anything about what they've asked so my recommendation would be one a and option one so that's just mine all right anybody else Jill thank you very much that's a lot to digest by the way um so I'm going to do my best and it doesn't mean I got it straight but I'm trying um I understand

18:45 1 a and I agree to that point but I would take it I like 1B as well to take it one step further you know I would um so that way we're most inclusive especially when there's some potential uh safety issues or you know some sort of issue that's peculiar to that property that deserves a little more time so I guess it's kind of a 1ab and then um so I like the way you have B penciled out but also like when you wrote uh when you wrote up option 2A um when it comes to failing septic systems because I think we can combine a lot of this um instead of calling out one specific option but I think it could be combined I agree and I think it should

19:31 be a a no-brainer get it done for a failing septic system non-consent just do it um going to have to right even if a neighbor says I don't want someone to dig up the land next to me it's like you got to do it so I I like that part I do like the peculiarities about some of the properties the way you penciled out where it's the hillside overlay District there's some areas in this town that have got some fairly steep properties that I think need special review um and I understand 1A too I mean it just I think I really think it could come up with a hybrid that combines these I don't know if I get a lot of support there but I like looking at these say let's let's come up with a option three that's a hybrid combination of of all the above um and then and I

20:19 don't know if it's I was kind of got kind of lost when you're talking I'm writing and when it comes to uh hearings I think that it's important for people to know that there're being people are being annexed or there's going to be an annexation and but and a notification the 100 foot was is a 300 foot and I think that is it we automatically mandatorily have to notify uh contiguous properties correct yes we have to notify owners well we have to notify people within 100t but it's um owners within 100t that is the law and there's an or if you need me to list and I'm okay with I know that there's renters and I know that there's owners

21:04 but the renters aren't paying the taxes on it the rent the I mean they are indirectly but the owners ultimately so uh it's kind of like if more know it's I guess it's not going to hurt too much but I for sure at the minimum owner being notified so I'm not stuck in the mud as far as the renters are concerned and being notification I just think that um and I hate government stuff getting so bogged down but I think the more people know what's going on the better I hate to say that but really they do and and and I think that gives people the voice to come in here and we've done a marvelous job putting us together but I I think that there could be a hybrid option out there that it would get a lot of support yeah if I may um so just to

21:52 clarify like if you went with option 1A which is no hearing for owner consent annexations that's just like across the board that's not putting any like stipulations on there we could like we could add that stipulation of 1B you know uh there is a hearing required if you're in those natural resource natural Hazard areas um it gets a little more tricky though like it it kind of seems like you can't do option 1A like straight across the board no hearings for owner consent annexations if you do then the other ones where you have you know you're under 10,000 square F feet in the R1 District or a failing septic cuz then you're kind of adding like you know you're you're placing Clauses on it I'm not saying you can't but it it it limits it so I guess based on what I'm saying then then then 1B seems to be more fitting with where I'm at is that

22:39 what you're interpreting that is yes I mean it it really depends on again like what what your concerns are so um Sandy bson who's here she's a comprehensive planning manager she pointed out to me like a good example of this are some areas in Springfield so um in one area we have small lots that maybe are in the flood plane under the criteria if they're under that 10,000 square feet and we go with like option um 2B we wouldn't necessarily have a public hearing unless we add those additional requirements of hey it's in a natural Hazard area um or natural resource area we do want to have a public hearing for that um does that make sense yes in the the the 10,000 square foot lot rule two

23:24 is that's mostly there so that those actually can be divided Lots as opposed to not dividable correct yes exactly because as I mentioned in the presentation we reduced our minimum lot sizes down from right about 5,000 now they're down to 3,000 so most Lots just don't meet that not dividable just enough for two cars to Park thank you very much yeah go ahead Cory thank you I'm gonna share my opinion um so my opinion um I like option 2B which includes both the um no hearing for the small lots and if there's a fail septic and I'm actually with Joe on like how do we add in the 1B pieces because I think we do need to pay

24:09 attention to that especially with um we just need to pay attention to that and and give folks a chance to weigh in and I know that that's been people have had opinions about that with previous annexations and I think that um again in in agreeance with Joe that having people um even if it takes a little extra time giving people an opportunity to come and participate and to understand because then it gives us an opportunity to explain to the neighborhood the other thing is um I this is also a thing that I'm not going to it's not a hill that I'm going to die on but I do like the idea of notifying both the owners and the folks who are living there because those those people are part of the neighborhood and are going to be affected and I don't you know I want to make sure they know what the changes are so those are my

24:56 opinions all right um so when I keep thinking back to the annexation earlier this year that it was up on a hill it was in thirston right we went we went through the we went through the hearing and we collected a lot of public information and then we ended up denying that annexation and I forgive me I don't remember the name of the the area but when in in the scenario that we went with something like one being would that still have gone to a public hearing yes because it's in a natural resource natural Hazard area so if you can you think of any of our annexations that were in the in scope for this work where where the public had provided like that

25:42 that's one example of it where the public had provided really relevant really colorful you know um feedback that would be excluded if we chose option one B give me one second Allison would you mind pulling up my Excel spreadsheet so um I've actually collected some information of annexations that have been submitted within the last year um so she's going to bring up some examples on the screen for you guys to see um just the ones kind of under the proposed code so like I mentioned anyone that's in that natural resource or natural Hazard it would go to a public hearing if you go under option 1B so it's kind of covered under that and the one you're referring to um that the application was denied

26:27 was Finley Heights um that's shown in yellow on on the screen if you're looking at it number four um but another one another good example on here um was uh one where we had uh a lot of neighbors that were concerned about development over by Riverbend it's a small narrow property um there wasn't a lot of Frontage and the neighbors came out and provided a lot of testimony during the public hearing process um so looking at um on the screen you're seeing the ones in yellow are the ones that were in owner consent annexation that application was not an owner consent annexation so it still would have gone to a public hearing but had it been an owner consent annexation if you'd gone under option 1 a um it would

27:13 not have been there would have been no public hearing no notice to the neighbors things like that and then that's where we get into like if you place additional restrictions on it so if you said it's it has to be under 10,000 ft in the R1 District well this property then wouldn't have applied does that make sense go ahead Victoria thank you um just a couple of things when we talk about those areas um the overlays in the riparian that's part of planning's review correct and so you're going to be looking at that stuff as well and then and and I have to say you're the experts on that stuff and knowing what what the code requires for those

28:00 areas and knowing whether or not they can be developed and what have you and and part of the annex and whether or not they can receive Services which was one of the big deals with the one in thirston was that there there were services that couldn't get there and that's one of the main criteria of that um I think it's important to note that the one over by Riverbend that we got all the feedback on those people were also I appreciate that but they were not citizens of Springfield they were in Lane County and I'm not saying that that voice isn't important I'm saying that the people that we answer to are the citizens of Springfield that pay taxes in the City of Springfield and that's where our responsibility should lie um but I also understand that we as the council if some if we're getting calls on these owner um initiated so if we

28:45 went with onea and somebody had concerns and they called one of us we could then call a public hearing or a meeting on that correct that is correct see that's where I'm talking about where we have that Authority if people have enough concerns they usually reach out to us as counselors as opposed to opening up to just anyone who wants to come in and have the microphone so I still I still am really really stuck on onea I would just stipulate that um we don't like if there's no uh public hearing for an owner consent annexation we then would not provide the public notice to those owners and occupants right to be owner the owners get the notific okay no none of them would be notified that's correct okay so it's not like onea and option one yeah okay so yeah and I and that's where I

29:31 think I'm I'm ending up with you know that 1B seems like where we where we want to be and um and I think the question in about that you brought up which is hey if it's in one of those Special Districts right and it's in this sort of small residential septic septic has failed I don't think I'm even as concerned with with with those right so I'm thinking about like well if in that situation where it's single lot and it the septics failing even if it's in one of those specialized areas I don't know that there's a lot of value to have the the public hearing about them but I more broadly it seemed like 1B was the place where we would include all the places where we've got relevant actionable feedback in the last year and maybe

30:16 exclude some of the more straightforward pieces yeah I would add mayor um I also looked into properties um submitted within the last year that were under that 10,000 threshold none of the annexations applications actually were under that 10,000 sare ft so again I think it's really going to depend on what annexations we see submitted in the future so most of these annexations they were over that 10,000 foot threshold they were for that point of development um but as I mentioned in the council briefing Momo we have 42% of our properties within our Urban growth boundary could qualify um if they're under that 10,000 foot threshold to avoid the public hearing so we didn't use it in the last year but we could use it in the future exactly okay other

31:03 comments um about the notice I think we've got to tell both owners and property uh property owners and occupants I mean I think that's like I think that's pretty straightforward um can you talk to us about next steps we're going to a public hearing I know we had a lot of discussion about different changes we would want to make are you going to prepare you know um make changes to the documents or do we have to bring the Planning Commission recommend forward and start there um so yes I it really depends on the recommendation you guys give me tonight if if most of the recommendation that I'm hearing is that you guys would like me to incorporate a revised option that incorporates more of the options that I presented in the code um so if if that's the option that you guys would like to be moving in um I

31:50 will then take those recommendations and include that in the legislative code amendments which are an attachment to um and I will present that at the public hearing on October 7th goad Joe um please help educate me on this on the one of the things that I have in my head thinking about is that let's say there is an annexation and then there's not an automatic hearing and then somebody neighbor whatever whoever got notice looks at that and says hey that was identified as a flood plane and they're not treating it as such or they have some sort of concern that may run a foul to what our rules are so is there a would there be a

32:35 trigger in which that person that brings that forward to maybe have the city attorney's office look to see if they have any legal standing in regards to their complaint so it would be uh automatically cause a hearing to make sure that that is uh addressed and maybe that's at the Planning Commission level I don't know but I just want to make sure that if someone brings something up that it gets some sort of review yeah um you know let me look into that some more and see we can have some information for you at the first um public at the public Hearing in the first reading so it sounds like you're saying you're looking for some kind of um fallback or safety if there's a mistake in how a property was

33:20 categorized and it didn't get a hearing right if if a citizen brings something up that could potentially be an issue and it may even be put the city in a liability position or position of liability um that we have some sort of Trigger or some sort of review process that will allow that to perk up and get the attention it needs to get so it can be uh addressed mitigated or saying okay we got to put the halts to this because we need to get that addressed that issue okay we can look into that and have something in the next packet go ahead point of clarification when it comes to these areas have you ever had a situation where you guys missed that I mean that's

34:05 a pretty big deal like when it comes to Hillside overlays flood Plaines when you're reviewing an annexation that's like part of the criteria correct yeah Ian that would be a pretty flagrant error to make I'm gonna have Mark if you wouldn't mind coming up here and just talking about Finley Heights me Mark's getting warmed up yeah let me let me add to that then too is I'm thinking specifically for example in Glenwood we have an annexation issue that used to be a service station that had underground pollutants or tox toxins that had then called for a um oh who's my planning or my my land people are talking about the toxicity or they had

34:50 to have an analysis in regards to underground pollu pollutants or pollution and would not have been caught had somebody not come forward and said I think that was there was some storage facilities there and there was so and for the record Mark Rust uh planning for Springfield the um the question about which natural Hazard areas Haley's outlined in the packet for the most part are all mapped Hazard areas so it's pretty easy to determine whether a property has one of those natural Hazard areas the one that's not specifically mapped is the hill side overlay because it's based on Contours and that can be very site specific so our GIS mapping isn't necessarily

35:35 accurate enough to the lot size to be able to determine that so in some cases we do have to calculate that um however I would say one of the back stops for that condition that's being raised as a concern is both the director of planning and the council both still have the opportunity to call it up to a hearing so if any of us hear about that concern and are worried about going procedurally sideways by not having a public hearing we can just have the public hearing anyway to cover it and then hear those concerns and then still make the decision based on the best information I'll just add I think you're referring to like the DEQ and contaminated soil that isn't I don't think currently contemplated as one of the triggers for

36:21 requiring a public hearing because we don't know about those always like you're referring to and that wouldn't necessarily um move a property into the level of requiring a public Hearing in order to Annex it as my understanding yeah I wasn't referring to this latest thing at all because I knew that that was answered but I think and it was even pre- Neal um maybe Mary B it was it was the properties in Glenwood and it was was it the skill horn property that was in 2004 2005 yeah I don't recall but that doesn't sound unusual yeah and so they had some underground fuel tanks that was a surprise to everybody and so but there

37:06 was people that had to had brought that up and said hey I think there was fuel tanks underneath there and everybody's like really and so it messed stuff up and I think councilor Doyle referred to the idea that through any subsequent planning action that would occur after an annexation those are the types of development standards that are reviewed um in when any actual development takes place on a property as well Michelle do you want to hop in here yeah as we're talking about this I'm just concerned about transparency but in relation to how so if the council or a director has the option to to request a public hearing if we don't receive that via like a constituent complaint um how can

37:53 you help me understand just clarify how we would know what is is currently in that realm of annexation requests so that we would be aware and potentially watching for something that you know that we might want to call a public hearing on so I think I'll try and address this and Haley may need to chime in but one piece of this that is also um not really been talked about yet and that is even though there's not a public hearing for these annexations now all of these will still become come before the council for adoption of a resolution to do the annexation so it could be that at the time that matter is on your agenda somebody May sign up for the public comment period you may have heard about

38:39 it you will have the opportunity to see it pull it off a consent calendar those kind of things so it will still come before this body it just won't actually be held as a public hearing but you will still have to approve it if that makes sense Victoria and just real quick I think that it's important that we you know our next topic that we're going to be talking about is uh the budget and things that are and things that are costing the city a lot of money and where we can find things and I and I think this is almost like a housekeeping issue and I mean I really delved into this this weekend so I think that what you you've put together is really really sharp and really smart so I appreciate it okay I don't see any other questions but we do need to give some sort of Direction so we could have them bring back what the Planning Commission

39:25 recommended or we can have then bring back a a different recommendation whether that's 1 a or 1B um I've heard some interest in ch so yeah I'm anybody else okay okay cons senses so can you bring back 1B when we do the hearing is there any other piece that you would like I'll take Mark's Place here Sandy bson of planning manager I guess the I heard some variations or hybrid as um councelor pisher is talking about them um clearly you want 1B but do you want any of the small Lots or failing septics

40:11 to even if they're in those natural Hazard or natural resource areas do you want those to go to public hearing and this is not a final decision this is what you would put into the code for the public hearing yeah it's our starting point right so no okay sounds like so small Lots would be out of the public hearing so anything under 10,000 square feet no public hearing and failing septics same thing yeah get her done yeah okay perfect anything else that you would that would be helpful to give for and then for the notice stick to the 300 or go down to 100 so

40:57 okay so I'm here okay I'm kind of looking around for some head nods so 100 feet owners and occupants okay okay so as Haley said she'll prepare that as an option the Planning Commission option will still be in the record um but at least people will know what you're thinking and then they can comment directly on that proposal at the public hearing and then before you make your final decision you can add further adjustments as needed okay great thank

41:44 much so the next item is the general fund structural imbalance with our team Finance right uh good evening mayor and Council uh I'm Nathan Bell the city's Finance director and with me tonight is Jessica mummy uh the city's budget and procurement manager and we'll be working together on the work that comes out of tonight's uh work session um this evening uh we're looking for guidance on how you would like to address the structural imbalance in the city's general fund as well as the persistent and growing uh deficit spend and I'm going to speak to that in a little more detail here in a few moments but essentially we want to make sure that

42:30 the work we bring back to you is in alignment with what you're looking for uh whether that be looking at potential um changes to outward facing Services potential reductions outward facing services or new Revenue generating strategies or a combination of the two so looking at the fiveyear forecast uh this forecast is familiar to you however I think uh the scale of the deficit is different than it has been in the past and speaking to the background on this um we've been bringing these forecasts to you now for years um both in the budget committee process as well as in work sessions in the fall when we kick off the budget committee um or the year's annual budget process and um

43:16 typically the scale of the deficit spend has been such to where we can address it with just kind of small adjustments to the budget um and even backing up a little further uh this structural imbalance has been with us now for a few decades primarily the result of of measure 5 and 50 uh voter approved initiatives in the 90s that put caps on the city's primary uh revenue for the city's uh general fund Services um but over that period of time we uh experien historically low inflation and really that allowed us to uh make adjustments kind of each successive year to balance that Year's budget those adjustments have been um expenditure reductions but U they've also been uh new revenues just to give an example uh just in the time that I've been in my role uh we

44:01 renegotiated the uh pilot the payment in L of tax uh with the city's local electric utility sub uh we also increased the uh RightWay fee that we charge our own utilities both the uh sewer and drainage funds and we retain that money uh in uh the general fund however um that has never really addressed that sort of long-term structural imbalance and it seems like every year we're back in front of you with the same questions and so U we're coming to you tonight really looking at having to do something a little more significant in addressing this um in this budget in front of you uh focusing on fiscal years 25 26 and 27 um and I'll speak to 20 through 30 those numbers are big however uh those are outer years um

44:48 there's a lot of estimates that are going into those numbers um based on what we've experienced uh in the economy over the past few years and what we've seen in our labor negotiations we're being conservative in those outer years so the takeaway from those outer years is not so much to focus on the deficit spend in those years but recognize that we have this uh trend of a growing deficit spend that needs to be addressed looking at fiscal years 25 uh 26 and 27 um we feel confident with those numbers um that have resulted in those deficit spends uh for instance um our largest expenditure is Personnel it makes up over 80% of our general fund budget and what drives that is our uh labor cost and the 25 through 27 period uh those

45:36 numbers are based on actual um settled contracts with the exception of one contract so Spa um we settled and that new contract began in fiscal year 24 um all the remaining contracts um are were open in U beginning in fiscal year 25 uh the current fiscal year with the exception of if F uh that's still in negotiations the numbers that we have that are in this um um fiveyear forecast reflect our last offer to that uh labor group however if uh they should settle higher that could change uh these numbers um another driving uh factor in uh these numbers is that we've had the arpa funds um that we've used to shore up our general fund the last two years

46:21 in addition to doing some great uh capital projects uh around the city uh We've also used those to cover some key um general fund positions and those dollars will be fully expended at the end of this calendar year uh and um those positions then come into the general fund um where they're supported by general fund revenues uh and then finally is uh purs um you know we were hoping that we wouldn't continue to see the pur increases that we've seen over the previous years um however uh again the inflation that we're experiencing wages is also driving inflation in the pur rates uh additionally there was a house bill that recently passed uh that changed um the obser uh benefits for Public Safety uh specifically uh in

47:08 regards to the retirement age that kind of rolls it back more to uh tier two um that alone we were told told would add a 1% um um increase not percentage increase of the rate of s but one percentage Point added to the rate uh as a result of that house bill and then um finally uh the pur rate is based on an actual valuation um that valuation that'll impact the 26 and 27 rates will be based on an actual evaluation as of July 1st 2023 uh and as of that um point in time uh the return on the Investments for perss was significantly below what they projected and so that's the other contributor to that so the entirety of the inflation we've seen in our labor

47:53 contracts uh the increase we're anticipating in per uh as well as um you know the arpa funds um um discontinuing uh that is what's driving the deficit spend that we're seeing um in fiscal year 26 and growing there Beyond couple other things I I do want to also address here is um the transfer to the ambulance fund uh that's included in this forecast uh that's something that's been in the forecast but we haven't uh fully realize some of those projections uh and so I've worked closely with um um John flet um our budget person that we work with um in Eugene Springfield Fire and really Tred up those numbers and we feel pretty comfortable with them uh the deficit spend that we have for fiscal year 26 is

48:38 um in the ambulance fund is $430,000 it's not out of the range of reasonableness in terms of in fiscal year 23 we had a deficit spend of 370,000 fiscal year 24 we actually had a surplus of 50,000 but still very tight budget but I think more importantly over that same period of time we also saw record GT revenues that's the ground emergency medical transport uh Revenue it's federal dollars that get passed through the state to make up for the uh capitated uh Medicare and Medicaid um receipts that we receive for transports and the state overpaid us um so we anticipate then that the revenues that we're going to receive for that program are going to decline and they're still a question of whether the state's going to require us to pay it back and when I say

49:25 overpaid us they over paid every jurisdiction in the state of Oregon so this is another one of those issues that I think will probably also be addressed um at the state level in terms of all these uh jurisdictions are struggling um with their um you know Fire and Life Safety specifically around reimbursements for ambulance transport so we'll see what comes of that that's a lot I'm going to pause and open it up to you for questions that that is a lot um I would like to break this part of the conversation up into really two sections one of them is if people have questions specific specific to what the fiveyear forecast currently says and then we can dive into a conversation about well what do we do next because I you know I've

50:11 got some specific Direction on how to address that so does anybody have questions about the the fiveyear forecast okay so before I open it up to other comments um one of the what you guys have a date that you're coming back and I I swear I think it's October 12th it's like October 28th it's October 7th so it's a tight turnaround actually I think we moved that to a different date Al Alison can you check please and because of that very issue that it is a tight turnaround so hold on SEC hold please we're going to pause for station identification

51:05 it's on the calendar for October 21st so nobody was right that's what I've learned from this conversation except Allison Allison had the source of Truth so the next part of the conversation is really what information do we want Finance to prepare for October 21st which is well how do we want to work our way through at a policy level no matter what this is like n Nancy going to have to balance this right but if we're going to make like if Nancy has to balance it without more Direction it's going to be really hard for this community um my recommendation at this point is I've asked Finance to bring back a charge sheet for for a mayor's task force um that would be a committee that would would be appointed out of my position to just get a community group together to to discuss

51:50 what you know what a recommended strategy through this might be and how to get to a point of structural structural balance and what structural balance actually means and give our give us give ourselves a chance to listen to what the community H has to say bring some stakeholders in and develop and develop a strategy and that would give us a place to put our foot on something solid to have this conversation with the community and um on the when we come back on the 21st really what I want what I'd like to see is you know a proposed set of questions you know a charge for that for for that group so that we can discuss what questions and feedback we would get back from them and lastly I think it's valuable to point out a strategy here can be a lot of things

52:36 right so it can be what our services look like it can be you know you know what Revenue options look like it can be Economic Development or lobbying efforts right it's got to be a holistic look at how to address this anybody else I do Cory um thank you and I appreciate what you said the end of that because I know that's been part of my conversations with the mayor and with others is that I think it's a both and right um as somebody who's done a lot of budgeting for agencies and organizations and divisions and all of that um we tend to just want to go just to the cuts it never hurts to look at at sort of holistically at things to see what what we're are we still doing what you know the core Services of what the city is

53:22 and we haven't really gotten serious in the City of Springfield at looking at Revenue and so my my poking at the the mayor is that whoever is on that task force to have folks that are willing to look at both of those because it's it's a hard conversation to have and we're not alone we've talked about you know how do we um how do we work with other municipalities and how do we put more pressure on the state that's been a conversation that's come up repeatedly it's like how do we look at um see if there are any any um any legislative things that can happen to help us with funding mun IP alties but we also are going to have to just like roll up our sleeves as Springfield and look at how do we um grow revenue and in what ways so that's that's all just make sure

54:07 that's part of the conversation Jo so in a nutshell I support what you're going towards and we can construct that the way we need to construct that or you can construct that the way you need to construct that and I'll support that anybody else all right Nancy do we you have enough Direction here or you have any other questions you want to add or comments we'll take comments too um I appreciate the feedback from the mayor and Council and thank you to Nathan and um Jessica for working on this issue um just to comment overall on um this uh our general fund uh forecast we are continually working on this document as information becomes more available we revise um you know when we

54:54 got the latest information for Purge we put that in so we we we continually look at this document that what I know that might some seem frustrating because it might be like well this is always changing well that's kind of the point because we use it as a a planning instrument so that's kind of thing one um thing two is um you know I think we have a a good uh grasp of what you're asking us to uh bring to you but let me just repeat what I think I heard so we're all clear um that you would like to have uh staff bring to you for the um 21st uh um meeting basically a charge or scope for a mayor's uh task force uh with um some concept about what would a

55:40 what does a structural balance mean for the city and then also a proposed uh list of questions or topic areas that this group could um could look at um not just in cuts which by the way we're already looking at internally we've started that as an executive team but also potential revenues potential legislative Solutions maybe even different uh ways to provide services so putting our fiscal condition through through a certain lens to see if you know there are other ways that we can um bridge this Gap or provide some relief to this Gap did I hear you correctly that's accurate okay thank you and Cory and just one more piece to but

56:26 on the record I think um and and to and to grow um we tend to always be so focused on just like holding it together being as lean as possible and when I look at the work that we need to do and I look at all the restructuring that Nancy and Neil have led to make us even more efficient like we we we need to like build housing and we need to support development and we need to do the things and so I think that's part of it for me too is like it's not just like how do we maintain but how do we start to just like get future forward and in terms of growth Steve as I have run for Council the thing I have emphasized mostly is the health of the city and to do that we have to encourage economic growth taxes and and more importantly

57:12 local businesses I don't like these big businesses coming in five years and then moving out and and that's happened to us several times so we need to we need to feed the small ones make them grow and generate generate wealth in the city higher property taxes and that would help us a lot we Victoria and then we'll go to Nancy um I just want to um thank you Council rodley about speaking about Revenue because I think we live in a community that we want to be proud of and people want Services right they they have an expectation of service and if we continually have to cut back on staff I mean specifically then that service level is going to be affected it has to be so I

57:59 think that we all as a community need to realize that if we want this higher level of expectation of the services that the community that the city provides then they have to be paid for and everything's going up so um I appreciate that we're going to look at all the options and not just cutting back because that's not always the best yeah see yeah I just wanted to I I appreciate councelor uh rodley and uh councelor Doyle's comments because important thing to mention is that this this general fund forecast is predicated upon the city maintaining its current service level which is already incredibly low um you know I I think we're probably at the lowest Staffing Point since we made significant cuts um

58:46 in 2008 when it comes to like level of um employment um so that's kind of thing one because what troubles me candidly about our our projection is that it's in my mind it really isn't a a it's already you're starting from a negative position because we're really not staffed to a level where we can do a lot of things more efficiently um we are literally to use a sports anology we have no bench you know we're one player deep on all of our positions and so that's that's challenging um but I know that that you know I'm trying to be very careful and pragmatic and conservative but I do want to call that out one one way is that that is manifest over the years is that in order to balance our budgets we've made trade-off decisions about where to

59:33 spend our money and one of the things that has kind of been um negatively impacted is our ability to do deferred maintenance on our buildings um you know we were putting money into a you know general fund to be able to do that and we're not doing that now and we and that bill will come due um and has come due in a lot of situations so you know we have older buildings with with this building here um with Booth Kelly other other things that we own that need to be maintained or or um dealt with in some way so that is something that I think about quite frequently all right I'm going to end it with two comments I've worked for some pretty big organizations right like in

1:00:18 my in my career looking out five six years seeing a gap right that's that doesn't that doesn't surprise me for big organizations right so the the comment to say that you you said that was to right focus on the couple years ahead of us get into some sort of structural balance and that out years would kind of fall in that that resonated with me quite a bit and then lastly I think the variation in this sheet is worth just noting right to me I'm reading this is directionally sort of right right 75 to 90% sure and then if you did this again tomorrow we could see some changes in some of the numbers as you constantly uh it's a dynamic situation as you constantly update

1:01:03 it all right thanks for bringing this to us I know it's going to be a long conversation but we've got it started anything else all right then that was our last item for the work session I'm going to go and adjourn us and then we will be back at 7 o'clock for the regular session thank you 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 Mo here councel rodley here councel Blackwell here councel Doyle here and councel Fisher here thank you please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance

1:02:08 there are two times designated for public testimony this evening under public hearings and business from the audience if you are attending in person please complete the request to speak card located at the front of the council chambers and turn them into the city recorder if you're joining us online with a tablet smartphone computer and our computer and wish to speak at any any of those times please use the raised hand feature in Zoom the order of public testimony is as follows anyone in person in the council chambers and then anyone who has raised their virtual hand first item please first item is Springfield upbeat item number one is mayor's recognition National diaper need awareness week and mayor this is your item all right I'm going to read a part of the Proclamation and then we'll have the group up and and take a take a

1:02:55 picture whereas diaper need the condition of not being able to afford a sufficient supply of clean diapers to keep babies and todlers clean try dry healthy and healthy can adversely affect health and well-being of children whereas National surveys and research studies report that nearly one in two families struggles with diaper need and 48% of families delay changing a diaper to extend available Supply whereas without enough diapers babies and Toler risk infections health problems that may require medical attention resulting in medical costs and parents may be prevented from accessible Child Care needed to go to work or school thereby D destabilizing the family's economic prospects whereas the people of Springfield recognize that

1:03:40 diaper need is a public health issue and addressing diaper need can lead to Economic Opportunity for the state's families and communities and improve health care for children therefore I Sean Van Gordon mayor of Springfield do hereby proclaim the week of September 23rd through 29th is diaper National diaper Awareness Week in the City of Springfield and I think diaper Banks their staff volunteers and donors for their service during the crisis encourage and encourage the citizens of Springfield to donate generously to diaper Banks drives and support those organizations all right and then we'll have you right up here and we'll take a quick

1:05:13 next item please next item under Springfield upbeat is organized retail theft Grant Chief sheer is here for this item I'm Andrew Shear the chief of police for the City of Springfield thank you mayor and councel for the opportunity to present to you tonight regarding the recent Grant award SPD received organized retail theft is is an increasing issue that's facing retailers Nationwide Statewide and right here in the City of Springfield in 2022 the state formed an organized or an Oregon retail crime task force that included a wide range of stakeholders from the public and Retail sectors to generate recommendations on how to address the

1:05:59 increasing problem of retail theft one of several recommendations put forth was Senate Bill 900 which ultimately was signed into effect July 1st 2023 by the governor Senate Bill 900 established and funded a $5 million local grant program to be administered by the state Criminal Justice Commission to support organized retail uh theft enforcement efforts and that Grant solicitation opened in 2024 and SPD submitted an application this was was a competitive Grant with SPD vying for a portion of the allotted $5 million and 18 different agencies from around the state applied for funding on August 1st 2024 the Criminal Justice Commission granted their Awards of the 18 agencies the largest Awards went to Washington count Washington County multi- agency task force that

1:06:44 represented several different police agencies and they they received 1.5 million Clackamus County receiv received 685,000 and the City of Springfield police received 5868 50 of the $5 million Grant that's over 10% of the allocated funds for the entire State the grant will fund the cost of targeted retail thft operations by supporting the Staffing cost for a sergeant multiple police officers dispatchers a detective and an intelligence analyst it also covers the procurement of equipment that will help combat retail theft such as computers radios camera systems cell phone data extraction equipment and specialized training for our officers in the area these types of Investigations to date SPD has run eight organized retail theft missions and made over 60 arrests not including the case

1:07:29 of the stolen Lego some of you heard about recently where SPD recovered over $200,000 worth of stolen Legos our retail our local Retail Partners here in Springfield have been very vocal and very pleased with the efforts of SPD and specifically the um work of the crime reduction unit or Crew That's led the fight against retail theft to date and I know the thoughtful approach we took in applying for this Grant and the established track record of success and strong retail Partnerships that SPD has fostered or what I believe helped the commission provide Springfield with this very generous award so we look forward to hearing more from our partners soon our Retail Partners as to the positive impact these missions are having on reducing their losses um today I just today I received an in invitation for

1:08:14 SPD to sit as a member at the central table of the organized retail crime Task Force at the state level moving forward and I know this is a direct result of the tremendous work of the SPD officers that they've put forth to date partnering with the local loss prevention um folks and for retail crime here in the City of Springfield so thank you for your time Joe and then we'll go to Cory I'm certainly not going to pass up an opportunity to make comment on this um this has been a great program you and your personnel have been doing an amazing job I am uh I come across many people in the loss prevention profession and they have got absolute amazing accolades towards your folks and the

1:08:59 efforts of SPD and you are truly making an impact I'm looking on social media where the posts have been I'm glad and I'm happy to see that you folks are uh active in making your post in regards to um identifying those types of activities and arrests and keep it coming and uh absolutely fantastic great job please extend my personal thanks to your folks and probably the rest of C I don't think anybody would not say that so thank you thank you Cory thank you um I I really appreciate you coming to share this and I appreciate you all and and being leaders in the state on this work it was not so long ago that we had the folks from Jerry's come and talk to

1:09:44 us about just how challenging it is for them and um you know we we can't be open for business in Springfield if our businesses are having such a tough time and so I really appreciate this and on the heels of our budget conversation I think there are really creative ways that we can find funding to do this Innovative work and so thanks to you and the team and I'm excited that we're just getting better and better at this so thank you thank you yeah please extend all our our our happiness to uh the the department for this um every time we see a a a small business or you know a business the size of cheres this issue comes up and to see that that we're proactively working with them to address it um they they tell

1:10:29 that story to us and how grateful they are for the engagement with the police department uh every every um small business I've talked to has been just really grateful for the engagement they've gotten out of the department and work around around this issue it's a big problem for them but they feel supported by the PD thank you and we actually had Sergeant Potter who runs crew on the radio this morning and I want to pass on something that he said if there's any business in the city of Springfields doesn't matter if large or small we don't just do this for big retailers when we run these missions we typically run them for multiple businesses at the same time so if you run a small business in the City of Springfield and you want to be a part of this call us anytime all right thanks Chief I just wanted to thank Chief sheer and uh deputy chief R and the leadership

1:11:14 in Springfield Police Department on the excellent work that they're doing in this proactive policing and I just want to comment that this type of uh activity not doesn't just benefit the business owners it benefits the entire Community um because it makes our whole Community safer it keeps businesses here in our community I think we've seen um a lot of instances where um especially in Portland where uh large uh businesses had to leave because of the uh the crime and theft so you know we're very thankful for our police here because we all benefit from from their efforts that's all thank you all right next item please mayor the next item is the consent calendar i' like to make a motion to approve the consent calendar second Neil could you

1:12:01 call a vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councel rodley yes councelor Blackwell yes councelor Doyle I and councelor pisher yes motion passes six yeses no NOS zero NOS um next item please next item is public hearings uh you have one public hearing this evening it's request for Springfield comprehensive plan map Amendment and zone change for 2.92 Acres of vacant property located on Newman Street in Glennwood this is ordinance number one an ordinance amending the Springfield comprehensive plan map by redesignating approximately 2.92 acres of land from Glenwood employment mixed use to light medium industrial amending the Springfield zoning map by rezoning the same 2.92

1:12:46 acres of land from Glenwood employment mixu to light medium industrial adopting a severability clause and providing an effective date this is a first reading and Andy limbert is here for this item thank you I'm here to redeem my punch card for uh public hearings as we talked about the last meeting um this request is for a site in Glenwood um in May uh Council adopted a motion to initiate this action and this redesignation in rezoning affects some vacant property that is close to and just west of the new uh warehouser headquarters building on Franklin Boulevard bring up the site um the site has been vacant for as long as I could

1:13:31 find air photos um so dating back in the 80s um there is a railroad Mainline along the western boundary the central Oregon Pacific Railroad this site is bounded also by another Spur Line along the eastern boundary and there's a Spur Line that actually runs right through it that goes to um the acore pipe site as well as the France Bakery which is just to the north west of this property uh this request uh would facilitate expansion of the existing atore pipe facility uh they have a manufacturing of PVC pipes uh Council earlier I believe at the work session was talking about annexation the annexation process um one of the things for annexations is provision of urban services and

1:14:16 utilities utilities include storm water sanitary sewer water all of which rely on those types of pipe uh to be laid into the ground for uh Urban Development and so that is this facility is literally bursting at the seams uh the request would accommodate some more lay down and storage space uh utilization of the railroad spur lines uh for um the transport of the finished product currently the site is in the employment mixed use District of the phase one Glenwood refinement plan area the request is to change it to light me medium industrial designation and zoning and this has the effect of removing this property from The Phase 1

1:15:01 Glenwood refinement plan and reverting it to the 1999 Glenwood refinement plan this does not however preclude it from being incorporated into a phase two of the Glenwood refinement plan area which is kind of internal to Glenwood uh when that ever that project occurs this site could be Revisited down the road for some type of redesignation rezoning potential um but the immediate need is for expansion of the uh the industrial facility which is just ajin zit across Newman Street and this would uh facilitate expansion of this um facility which is a a traded sector company uh so this is a change of the zoning uh to light medium

1:15:47 industrial and this did uh go before the Planning Commission and they unanimously adopted a recommendation uh in support of this proposal I would also note that the applicant um is here this evening um they may wish to speak to the matter and I'd be happy to answer any questions if you have them staff did not receive any um testimony regarding this proposal any questions all right I'm going to go and open the public hearing I have one card this evening it is for Kelly Wood please come up and state your uh name and address for the record and you have 3 minutes

1:16:33 good evening my name is Kelly Wood and I am the safety and land manager for wildish Land Company and I just wanted to be here first of all to say thank you for the for you know your consideration on this and then to answer any questions um I know that you know this this means a lot to atcore we of course uh work closely with them on other aspects of the property and they have a lot of uh a lot of pipe and they would really really appreciate having some extra room for that storage um I think that it's uh it's pretty limited on its ability to be developed being located between the two Spurs and so it's uh there's not a lot of opportunity and there's a business next door that could use it so we as the land owner support that and uh yeah so I

1:17:18 appreciate your your consideration thank you Kelly I don't have other cards is there anybody online NE no hands for this item I'm going to go and oh come come on so you're going to State your you're going to State push the button it'll turn green uh then state your name and address for the record and then you're going to have to fill out one of these for the city recorder otherwise I'll get in trouble at the end of the meeting uh Josh Smith uh I am the HR manager at at cor uh and so I just like to say that you know part of the partnership with

1:18:04 wildish that uh we are bursting at the seams with uh pipe uh which does uh help with the infrastructure of the city and and the country um but we are uh definitely uh going into new so we do electrical and and water pipe and sewer and all those different things all those different pipes but uh it's uh as we move into some new uh new uh pipe that we're manufacturing we're we're finding ourselves uh with limited space to be able to uh grow the

1:18:49 business all right thank you thank you and Neil I heard you say nobody online no hands for this item all right I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing uh this this is this item is a first reading only it's no action tonight so thank you very much for coming out and then next item please next item hang on i' like to make a comment about sure GL refinement plan was put in place about 20 25 years ago it was essentially a concrete wall around Glen in which perab development of any business inside the community they go to the city and they look at that plan say no way so nothing's happen so this is this is one instance where we're starting to open that up a little bit and re redefine some of that properties and we need to continue on doing

1:19:35 that all right thanks Steve next item please next item is business from the audience right I've got a couple of cards the first is Ben Wilkinson and then we'll have Trudy up at the same time um Ben and Trudy contacted me earlier and asked to do their three minutes together since it was about they specifically about the block party so they're going to get six minutes for the two of them and make some comments state your name and address for the record and then you guys are on I am Trudy botchery 3965 Richland Street um my name is Ben Wilkinson and I also reside at 3965 in Richland Street did you have anything else you want to say um I'm the organizer of the

1:20:21 Springfield block party and Trudy is the artistic director for that event did anybody from Council have the opportunity to attend this year yes we're increasing our ranks by double for Council I believe over last year though I believe we missed you mayor Van Gordon or if I didn't see you I apologize there were a lot of people there um some estimate about 10,000 but I wanted to highlight a few photos today which is why they have graciously allowed me to have the uh presentation here um this is kayal talking to obviously Homer I mean no one can mistake this amazing costume for anyone other than Homer um in front of our famous mural which celebrated its 10year anniversary there you can see City staff um handing out free donuts which I don't think lasted very long did they no they didn't uh they were very

1:21:07 popular and then also you see a family taking a selfie in front of the mural there um there isn't a day that goes by that I don't see people at that mural but it was really neat to see the city gather around this history and tradition of our uh of our can I click through Al you got it for me oh the little one okay thank you so much uh the history and tradition of our community oh yeah look okay community so rancia Hispana has been happening at the plaza for longer than I can remember but it is an incredible event that we get to partner with Antonio on and that event is always such a hit this year activating Fifth Street of the block party really helped us bridge that cultural connection between the two events and everyone is thrilled with those going together

1:21:53 moving forward you can see that we actually borrowed Mariachi Monumental there uh to come and perform for us those guys just work so hard here I am delivering them some refreshment in the middle of the street before their performance um and then we also have rise and shine bringing some of both their uh residents that they work with and and and uh team members down to help activate uh Community oriented for people of all socioeconomic and um abl body access uh members of our community Partnerships my presentation I'm I'm not so good at the Google Slides guys I I'll work on my presentation next go around this is Bane Gardner you know his work you've probably seen it everywhere and uh we have a brand new art piece to show

1:22:38 off thank you very much to the Chamber of Commerce for helping fund this specific art piece and as you can see here is a family taking a photo um if you get up close and personal I can't even begin to count the number of signatures on that mural but it's well in the multi- thousands I may actually just pay somebody to count them someday cuz I'm curious um we also have the city of Springfield's Transportation uh and bicycle uh um staff uh partnering with Cascadian mobility and others to help create a bicycle activation zone out here in the parking lot these kinds of strategic Partnerships are what make the block party better I have lots of ideas about what the party should be Trudy's ideas are better than mine which is why she's in charge of the artistic Direction but it's Partnerships like

1:23:23 these with the city staff with the Chamber of Commerce and with every part of our community that make the block party a true representation of what we do why because we have family here in Springfield now I picked these three photos there were so many to choose from and it's hard but look here you have Cascadia Mobility providing a free bike valet thank you very much City of Springfield Transportation uh to the event they have a small child going into that seat they rode their bikes down to this event and you can see Dad spikes coming out the back there um they got to experience the event in a unique way that would not otherwise be available to them uh or the city of where the ODOT Highway otherwise closed um also you have a a family here both uh with

1:24:09 someone in a chair and a walker I believe um and experiencing the block party in a way that would never be available to see downtown Springfield so we create these levels of of opportunity for people to celebrate and gather in our street and then of course you got a playing with some horseshoes like this story is the story I want people to tell people about their community so that when they grow up and they go off to college they remember these memories this is part of what makes it so magical for us to have an event right um there's my friend Denise she's helping that young girl with the long jump hey maybe we'll see her uh over at Hayward Field in the future or maybe not but she gets to come down to the middle of the street and play with healthy moves I partner with healthy moves it do Ros and other

1:24:55 elementary schools here in Springfield to create opportunities like this again we have kids in the bicycle Zone and Bubbles who doesn't like bubbles so more activation this year for age levels mostly younger but trying to create that sort of all ages magic of of a of a party making sure that it's also affordable so that the families can come and participate for free they don't have to pay for anything so they can do face painting they can do all the obstacle workers horses the bounce houses they can cruise and not have to spend a dime yeah absolutely yeah economic uh access for everybody as members of the city and and here we are we should talk about business Springfield is open for business you can see Oakshire Brewing there I think you know they signed a

1:25:41 25-year lease uh one year ago at last year's block party they had not yet signed that 25e lease so I'm just saying they came down had a great time and now they're invested in our community I'm excited about that you see our local hockey organization cuz I love hockey here repping a great undersung sport in the state of Oregon we're growing for hockey in Oregon thank you so much um and you also see uh our hand of the heart massage who's made Springfield at home for about 18 eight years now excuse me um safety and public Outreach was high on my list of priorities thank you so much to SBD for having such a big presence this year and helping make it all happen and then I think I had a little thing but I am out of time so I did send y all a letter it has links

1:26:26 feel free to check them out feel free to ask me questions at a later date I will take phone calls uh emails love to chat more thank you both for coming thank you all right uh Maria hey Ben make sure you stay because Victoria is gonna have a comment when we're done what I'm speaking to an ongoing situation in the public RightWay commonly known as transient alley that's located between A and B Streets and adjoins my property first how did I get

1:27:11 here I purchased my home on the 1300 block of B Street after retiring from a career in public service and Public Safety unfortunately for me the right of way had recently been cleaned by the city when I viewed the property and the chronic conditions existing were not disclosed by the seller while making substantial upgrades to the property I soon experienced daily noise and physical disturbances by persons occupying and loitering in the alley obvious mental health issues and Drug activities result in unpredictable and unsafe behaviors at all times of day and for extended periods of time given this limited Forum I'm requesting the city consider the following first a right of way is established for Transit and access to public utility its purpose is not for extended

1:27:56 occupancy and illegal activities the municipality is accountable for activity in the right of way this includes programmatic management and maintenance of its consequences such as unattend and abandoned items trash biohazards and antisocial behaviors the area directly behind my house is used for camping drug use and transactions and as an open air bathroom in addent in addition my fence is hit reached over used as a clothes line and he even been defecated on the recommendation I received from one city hall employee to get a gun and hose them down is Extreme to me but it does ILL illustrate a shared frustration second enforc prohibition of

1:28:42 camping on public property and easements adjoining residentially zoned property the current camping ordinance is outdated and and insufficient expending resources to impose fines on people who cannot or won't pay does not support them or neighborhoods sadly the commitment and service of our police and DPW operations Personnel is often undermined by constraints of existing statutes and policies for example transient alley was cleaned up by the a city hired contractor on Friday the 13th and has already been reoccupied our limited resources need to be utilized more effectively and efficiently from conversations with my neighbors I know that they like me don't

1:29:27 feel for safety for theirselves pets or property embedded in these issues is a need for immediate action for everybody's safety and well-being so that everybody wants to be in Springfield thank you thank you and then I have marjerie next I'm margorie and I live on the corner of this um area at 14th Street and the B alley I have made several phone calls to the police department on non-emergency calls due to gunshots down the alleyway

1:30:13 I've also heard women screaming in the bushes and have found them loitering in the bushes um just beyond my house um I bought my house in 2016 I do realize that 14th Street is a problematic area as it does have a very busy street which no one goes 25 but we won't discuss that now and on that on that subject I know it is not probably the better part of town and I do realize that when I purchased my home but it's what I could afford my husband passed away two days after I moved into my home I have extensively remodeled my home of $50,000 and have tried to keep it clean and tried to keep it orderly for the City of Springfield I do feel as though as my privacy and my backyard use is

1:31:01 being um overrun by those who are in the alleyway consistently cussing throwing things using um Chuck sticks and other items and as as of last week I took pictures and I do have them on my camera of a drug deal occurring with pizza from 7-Eleven for a drug deal I just have to say that it's not safe and it's very scary and I agree with Maria she lives down just the um Alleyway from me I am the corner of the alleyway so I get a lot of the traffic it's very scary and I don't know if many of you without fences around my yard I do not feel safe I have had an officer come by my house one time and he said these why do you worry about it these

1:31:46 people are they're not they're not going to hurt you they're just they're regulars they live here all the time I said if that's the issue then some needs to take care of it and I have had nothing but trash and garbage around my fencing as well as having to go down the alleyway and concerned about my own dog who continually barks at the fence to keep them away all I'm asking for as well as Maria is that we get either and I understand the patrol is is outstretched but I ask and I just plead that would somebody in the City of Springfield consider our Alleyways that are overgrown and are a very big Hazard and are now the encampments to many of the homeless that are continu to move around and again this morning one returned and he has defecation all over

1:32:32 him I understand it's a tough time and I don't want the homeless to feel like they can't be anywhere but in my backyard right now it isn't safe and it's very scary and I pay taxes and the church as well as had to put up a large fence with um iron work on it in order to keep them out I'm just asking would you please consider looking at these alleys ways as we begin to grow the city all right thank you I don't have any more additional cards Neil is there anybody with their hand raised online no hands online okay so one of the things before we jump in here I know some folks are going to have comments about the alleyway here in a second um

1:33:17 we're going to have a little bit of a conversation I'll let some folks jump in Neil can we have some you got a couple people here from public works right and then can so once we're done just chatting amongst ourself if we can have somebody from Public Works meet with you in the hall and maybe Chief if you can chat with them a little bit and get some information um they can help direct you with the more specific things about like well what do we do how to deal with some of the patrol issues how to deal with some of the you know the Public Works issues I'm GNA let some other folks jump in here go ahead thank you so um first of all I know that we've exchanged some conversations too because this is in W 3 and which I think is a great

1:34:02 neighborhood um I was going to say I'm going to take a little issue with it not being great neighborhood it is a great neighborhood and that area is really challenging and problematic and I know that um Neil and Brian went out to take a look at it and I and I just want to let you all know that I appreciate you bringing it forward and I think having a conversation specifically around the alley and the alleys in those areas that are close to downtown is an important conversation for us to have we haven't you know we've talked about right of way is this sort of big overarching and um the alleys are a little bit of a different situation because and some of the alleys are like extended yards into those alleys and things that make it a little bit challenging so I appreciate that you all are staying on top of this and I know that Neil and Brian because they

1:34:47 responded when I reached out to them about this and there's still a lot of work for us to do so thank you all right any other anybody else okay that one spot so Neil um can chat with him in the hall well I'll ask um Jeff Pascal since Brian is not here but I know Brian and Maria met today Brian went out personally and um I think that's part of the frustration is folks were moved and um then right back and so it's really challenging for folks um but we'll keep discussing yeah so Jeff you want to raise your hand so they can find you all right so if you guys can chat with Jeff and the chief and if we can get some more information back um

1:35:34 about this as an issue that would be that would be great Victoria okay so I'm sorry I'm going to comment about the block party and not on that um and I feel bad following after that because that sucks what you're having to go through and you shouldn't have to be dealing with that um I'm really bummed I missed the block party this year had something going on at my house I was there last year loved it uh I have talked to numerous people and just a tiny bit of feedback is that there were some elderly folks who really wanted to watch a lot of the shows but they just couldn't stand that long and so I don't know if there's any way to provide any type of like specific for disabled folks to be able to sit and like have them reserved for people that maybe have that um that might be a thing to consider so

1:36:20 other than that everybody just sounded like they had a great time they just couldn't quite and it was hot and it was hard for them to stand so that's all I had for feedback but thanks and thank you for doing what you do I hope we can keep doing it all right any other Council response go ahead Joe I did make it to the block party and it was fun thanks I did not make it to the block party and I look forward to doing it next year it was my 21st anniversary at the party and I didn't make it this year I was working out of town and I was sad to miss it because I've went in the past and have had a blast every time I really appreciate it sure I too had fun at the block party it was awesome to see so

1:37:06 many people enjoying restaurants and all of the festivities that we were experiencing down there and it was really hot all right I think we're ready for the next item next item is resolutions um item number one is a resolution of necessity Daisy Street and South 42nd Street roundabout that's on good evening mayor council this is uh Jeremy Shear City surveyor um the the resolution before you is uh concerning the the Daisy

1:37:51 Street uh 42nd Street a roundabout project which was approved uh this year for the uh 2025 29 CIP projects um this rightaway acquisition is a u the whole process is a um a critical path for protect um for project scheduling the success of the of the project requires all RightWay be acquired with no holdouts the resolution of necess necessity not only ensures that the needed rights are acquired but ensures that land owners are treated fairly under the law there are 11 permanent rightaway Acquisitions nine of which are under private ownerships two of them actually are uh we own the

1:38:36 city the other Acquisitions are uh temporary construction easements which go away after um once the uh project is done uh most of the Acquisitions are strip takings except for uh two um there's one uh located in the Northeast Cor corner and one at the southeast Corner those are um about one the the I think the Northeast is a th000 square feet and the southeast is 2,000 I might I might have that messed up or mixed up but um so finally um I'll just leave with leave with this this this is um actually probably one of the first uh first uh times that we've been able to use internal staff to acquire uh rideway um

1:39:25 under uh a federally as a federally certified city um projects like this can be handled internally or internally with some uh specialized Consulting so this one um of course we don't have an on staff appraiser um so uh we will we will need to consult that out but uh some of the appraisals can be done administratively um by by staff and uh the negotiations can be done by staff saving a considerable amount of funds so with that um I don't have anything else I can take questions if you have any um so I appreciate the project because I do know that area it's part of my ward Southeast Corner however I have

1:40:11 a disdain uh for emminent domain and um I have a very strong um personal feeling about personal property rights and so my vote will reflect that Jo just some points of clarification you may not know the answers but you may so if I recall the the uh project conception was based on trying to move bicycle traffic off of Main Street to Daisy Street and the total project cost has been maybe somebody knows right je Stan or Jeff yeah what's the

1:40:58 city cost and what's the grant grant contribution about I believe the grant is about 900,000 I for the whole right the whole shot yeah well this is so if you recall so the the the Virginia Daisy project it started out as we were looking at the whole length at one time right and projects cost just kept you know increasing as we looked at the whole length and so when we met with Council oh several years ago we broke it into into several phases so we've done we've done the first phase which was from 51st on um this and then we identified just this intersection and this intersection while yes a bicycle um Corridor project was also identified as a vehicle safety

1:41:44 because one of the things with the scurve in there is site distance is really poor with those stop signs and so we do have a high um tendency for near misses and collisions and so this is to address that site distance issue with a roundabout and then we also have the phase of Virginia between 32nd Street and 42nd Street that's another phase identified in the CIP we also have 32nd Street um identified for that RFB the P pedestrian Crossing in the future and we actually have funds for that so it's moving forward as a separate project as well right and you didn't give me any numbers but I don't have all of the numbers off the top of my head but I do recall that if if when we if we lumped it all together

1:42:30 we were talking about in the in the five to6 million range and we were trying to use the funds that we had at the time and and address it in phases in where we could do the most um of the project with the funds we had at the time and then continue to apply for Grant funds right it was close to my recollection was close to seven and um and I know that that from 32nd going East to 42nd um there was some land issues there was there was parking taking away parking lots of parking from citizens and um widening and narrowing Etc there was some work done plus there's Planters um tree planting areas I think too um and that was literally under the guise

1:43:16 of making it a bicycle route correct so through the planning process working with the adjacent property and know so a lot of those tree Wells or those locations to narrow the road up and put and and put sherow in and and to slow traffic down to the 25 M hour designation was we worked very closely both the planning team and the engineering team with the property owners to where do they Park which side of the road do we want to put those on because we had we had several citizens approach us we want a tree well in our yard because we want you know we want that in front because we don't want parking in front and so we did try to coordinate that with all of that through as that project moved forward there's also some raised Crossings and also some of those speed cushions that was

1:44:01 probably one of the first areas we we put multiple speed cushions to help slow traffic down as well and and equally I remember um testimony from citizens about how they did not like it and they did not like Wan their driveways shortened and loss of parking so I wanted the point I'm getting here is that basically the entire project except for maybe the round of about in regards to the for Sight uh dangers of vehicular traffic but at close to $7 million and I've been dying of curiosity since this thing has been started and almost coming to this point is how many bicycles use it per day that's a great question and I we can get that no we could probably get that number for you because I know it's

1:44:47 part of our transportation program we have been putting counters out in different locations for bicycles so I will work with Drew and if we haven't gotten counts we can work on getting counts for you um but you know where I'm going with it I mean as far as yeah have we actually so the goal was to move to try to give bicycles a place off of Main Street so you should be able to say tell us as a council these are how many bikes that are not using Main Street now or reduction and these are the bikes that are using Daisy Street now as an increase because we spent $7 million to justify that and what I want to see is and be able to get down as to how much it's costing us per trip for bike and I think I'd be we could probably buy him a

1:45:32 car yeah so I I will say we haven't spent $7 million because that's that's why we broke it into phases we didn't have the $7 million we had like a million dollar and then we applied for some other Grant F funds from ODOT from the state to do an overlay in one section and so that's where we kind of worked with the pavement conditions in one section to Overlay it and then what um what parts of the um bicycle plan the bicycle corridor plan that was approved by council could we Implement I would say to date we've spent about $2.5 million on the first few phases and then with the roundabout upcoming and then we applied for more funding for the 32nd Street and Virginia Crossing so we we

1:46:17 are't that that was what kind of put the breaks on the project was we didn't have the $7 million all in one at one time to do the project so that's when we came to council to reorganize how we were doing um projects so anyway so to to kind of put that we haven't spent $7 million we haven't even spent close to five we've only done really one phase of the project and we're working on two more phases of the project right now which is 32nd Street and 42nd street and I get it and the point I'm making it's OB I mean you have to see the point of making no I understand so have how effective as the the current project a taxpayer it to me I don't care where the money came from whether it's from OD do or SP of Springfield although I care more about City of Springfield dollars but yeah I

1:47:03 really when people ask me to say okay hey this project is awesome but how many what have we gotten for that what what is the payback on that and if we have gotten a lot of bicycle traffic moved actually off of Main Street then that means we've met the goal we've met we've met the purpose and I can get we can work on portions of that because what I'll say is since we haven't completed the full Corridor you know I don't know how effective it is been on that Virginia piece so that 32nd to 42nd Street so I can I can work with our our our transportation planning staff to look at what can we do because I know we have put counters out on various different paths and there are a couple paths that tie in here so we can probably look at what data we can gather

1:47:50 on the sections we have completed but I I I will say we haven't completed the full Corridor so that's that that that's so I won't be able to get a full picture so it'll be partial information but we can keep updating the information Jeff I get it and and I'm not trying to create a project for you I really am not and I don't want to I mean the the horse is out the gate so I know that and we can't change that part but I'm bringing this up because I think it's on people's mind it's kind of the elephant in the room especially when it C it has other people that are thinking and asking the same things especially on social media that um it's our job to make sure that we're not creating someone else's shanger law but we need to create something that's going to be safe for many people and and

1:48:36 justify it through that way and and that's where I think if we can figure out at least ballpark what the usage is what the reduction of uh accidents bicycle versus pedestrian versus I mean pedestrian bicycle versus vehicle accidents since the construction of this has been reduced from this to this that's great numbers and I don't know if we could I don't know if we've done that yeah no I I hear you and I think that's why I'll go back and work with Drew because I know what you're what part of what I hear you asking to is maybe an update because we've spent dollars here and there on a lot of different bicycle projects and I know he's been working with our partners to put counters out at different places so it's like how effective in a way has the whole program

1:49:21 been and are we being are we putting our dollars where they're the best place to put them all right any else I think we're ready for a motion that would be me um i' like to make a motion to adopt a resolution exercising the power of eminent domain pursuant or 35600 through 35625 concerning an acquisition of permanent right of way and temporary construction easements necessary for the daisy Street South 42nd Street roundabout Capital Improvement project project number P 21159 second the vote please yes councelor Weber yes councelor Mo yes councel

1:50:06 rodley yes councelor Blackwell yes councel Doyle no and councel pisher yes thank you motion passes five yeses one no next item please any business from the city council any other business block party was fun then already left it doesn't count oh darn it and I did get a donut so all right next item please any business from the city manager no further business thank you and any business from the city attorney uh no business thank you returned everybody have a good night