Springfield City Council — December 8, 2025

0:05 >> You would think I would get that right eventually. I'm going to call the Springfield City Council work session to order with a roll call. >> Mayor Van Gordon >> here. >> Councelor Weber here. Councelor Mo >> here. >> Councelor Rodley >> here. Councelor Blackwell >> here. Councelor Buck >> present. >> And councelor Stout >> here. Thank you. >> We have three work session items this evening. The first one is planning commission interviews and Sandy Bellson is here. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Sandy Bellson. I'm the comprehensive planning manager and staff to the planning commission. So, tonight we have two more applicants for you to interview for position on the planning commission. We actually have um two open positions and you previously interviewed one other person. Um so, we have Wendy Warner and Walter Dew. And I will also note that um

0:50 both of these people also applied for the community development advisory committee and we didn't get sufficient applicants for them. So, that would be an option as well. And could you correct us? I believe the other person that we interviewed for planning commission, we were fine with moving forward. >> Correct. >> Okay. So, we're interviewing two people for one spot and if we can convince the other person into another spot, we can find a spot to place them. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> And of the um planning commission spots, we have one for three years to fill um councelor Buck's position and then one um four-year term. So, we would need direction on which one to go for three years and which one for four. >> And when you look out the next little bit, there's not anybody else that uh that we're planning to lose off planning

1:35 commission at this point. >> Not shortly, I hope. >> Me, too. All right. Thank you. Anybody have questions before we let Sandy sit back down? All right. I thought we were fine. All right. Wendy, do you want to come on up? >> Hello. So, what attracted you to uh a plan of the planning commission? >> I'm interested in the development of Springfield. I've been a 30 year 30 plus year resident and have seen a lot of changes and feel like I could offer some

2:22 insight perspective and economic development and infrastructure are two major goals. If you think about how development happens, do you have any opinions on how cost should be shared between the developers and public? >> I don't know enough to be able to answer that. If you had a magic wand and you had the ability to change the development code, what would you change? >> I would change uh some of the uses of public land. >> Okay. And how do you see the city changing in the next 10 years? And how do you see the planning commission

3:07 helping to change the city? I feel that Springfield has a great opportunity for some growth. Um, we have some empty buildings and of course the economy is changing and I feel that we are on the prefite of being able to influence some of those changes that are going to happen. Uh, for instance, I heard there may be a sports uh facility going in at the new Royal or the old Royal Caribbean and I think that's pretty exciting and I would love to see more things like that. >> Could you describe the relationship between the planning commission and the city council and then the city staff and the planning commission? I believe that this role is to advise and give insight, but ultimately

3:53 uh the elected officials get to make the decisions. >> And I'm going to add one on the fly here, especially since the SEAK conversation's going on. Can you just um if we chose to ask you to serve on SEAK, would you is that something you would be willing to do? >> Yes, that would be. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> Sure. Wendy, come back. >> Come back. I want to ask a follow-up question to number two. Um, you said that you would if you could change something or I think it's number three. If you could wave a magic wand, change uses to public land. Do you have any examples of like what what you're thinking about that? Well, I think there's opportunity for some of the public land to um be,

4:41 how do you say, uh cut out for other uses. Um we have uh some great infrastructure here, but there is areas for opportunity to do some development um outside of what things are already set. So, uh, for instance, the pathways that are going down, there's there's some opportunity to put some retail locations along there. Um, make it so it's uh a more of a stop >> as people bike or walk down the mill. I think it's called the mill >> pathway. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay.

5:41 >> Well, thank you so much and good evening. Thanks for coming down. >> Of course. >> I'm going to ask you the hard one first. Absolutely. >> Which is if we asked you to apply, sit on the CDA, would you Is that something you're willing to do? >> I would be open to that. Yes, absolutely. >> All right. Thank you. What attracted you to sitting on the planning commission? Well, I'll start with saying I'll try to keep this not long-winded. Um, I I had the questions and I was kind of prepping like I would back in my college days, but um, so I applied because I I genuinely enjoy understanding how a community function and grows. Um, and I've reached a point in my life where I am ready to become more involved with the place I live. Um, I've called it home for 27 years, which is happens to be how old I am. And so over my time, I have seen it grow and change. And I can say I I truly love this town. and it's, you know, better than Eugene. We have

6:26 that one. But, uh, I also see that it it wasn't really for me about applying about politics or or a future in that. It was more about wanting to be part of the thoughtful and practical process that will shape Springfield in small but meaningful ways. Um, as a resident, I I currently live in the urban growth boundary, and so I get to see some of the fears and the impacts that as the city expands, potential costs that might get relayed to um homeowners, developers, or whoever owns apartment complexes, for example, sewer lines or other stuff being connected to homes. And so to have a voice for them on the commission, I think, is very important. Economic development and infrastructure

7:12 are two major council goals. If you think about how development happens, do you have any opinions on how cost should be shared between developers and the public? >> For that, I would say I I tend to fall into a more pragmatic approach looking at at both sides. Um I think that cost should be reflective of both the impact of how the of the development, my bad, sorry, and who benefits from the improvements. um if a project is triggering the specific like a specific need for improvement um that otherwise wouldn't be borne by the city um in its normal day-to-day operations for example say it's we need to get turn lanes put in or utilities need to be extended into a property I think that needs to be covered by the developer whereas if a

7:59 if we're looking at infrastructure um that has a broader and a more long-term community effect and impact Um, and so if it's something like increased system capacity for wastewater or if we're dealing with improving major corridors and arteries or just older roads, I think that's something where the city has a reasonable role and almost an expectation to step in and help cover the cost and share it with the development because it's going to be for the mutual benefit as the community as a whole while also it shouldn't just be on the developer. Um, I would I would ultimately just end that and say it's it's not about choosing one side of the other. It's we're the aim is to calibrate the cost so that the development remains viable while the

8:46 community isn't necessarily subsidizing um a for-profit enterprise. >> If you had a magic wand and had the ability to change Springfield development code, what would you change? >> I'm not a homeowner. Um, and I haven't really had anyone close to me have any run-ins with Springfield Development Code or issues. So, I I don't really have too much. Um, okay. >> Yeah. So, how do you how would you like to see the the city change in the next 10 years and how do you see the planning commission helping that? This is one where um I actually kind of remember I can see it now and I remember when I was growing up spending time with one of my mom's co-workers which was um Jodi Egan and um listening to her husband Dan the former Chamber of

9:32 Commerce director talking and I see the need for it now for what he was envisioning and and I'll get to that was I'd like to see Springfield kind of become a place where families and young people have more of a reason to stay in town for entertainment and not just shoot over to Eugene. Um cuz we have gate what used to be gateway mall now it's the shops of gateway we have a lamelane we have some what we could say roaring rapids and camp putt over in Glennwood but we don't have stuff like valley river we don't have arcades bowling alleys stuff that's family centered that people want to go to and enjoy and so um I think there's a real opportunity for that and I think that the planning

10:17 commission is there to support it by helping shape the land use policies and make recommendations that promote um these entities, these businesses to come in and have a successful chance of staying established here. >> Could you describe the relationship between the planning commission and the city council and then staff and the planning commission? >> This is the one where I I could have gone off because I was at Lane Community College and most of my time was on state and local politics. So this was a fun one for me. It was um so the planning commission and the city council operate as a um in a complimentary kind of structured relationship. Um city council sets the policies is the policy setting authority. Um so they adop comprehensive plans. They do all the development approvals. Um they have the final say.

11:04 Um whereas the planning commission kind of works upstream of the council and works with the minutiae where we become the filter. Um commissioners conduct the detailed review of proposals. Um for example like evaluating code amendments. Um but then after the planning commission conducts analysis they have to compile all their information and their findings and present it generally as a variety of options to the city council for review and consideration. Um it basically becomes a two-step system. council establishes where the city wants to go and the planning commission helps to present the how of how can we get to that goal.

11:49 >> All right. Thank you very much. So we have sounds like two questions potentially three. One of them is we need to find another person for planning commission. We need to give and then we need to give you know guidance on uh what uh what term we want them to follow and then the third term is whether or not we want to have a the other ask the other person to serve on CADC. Does somebody want to go first? It's going to be a long night at this council Blackwell. She was >> uh two excellent candidates again. Thank you so much. Um I hope to see you both serving in some capacity. Uh, my choice for planning commission is Walter and I

12:37 would recommend um Susan for uh or Wendy, I'm sorry, Wendy. Sorry about that. >> Councelor Roley, >> I actually um have the same opinion that councelor Blackwell does. I think these are full of amazing candidates. This has been such a great season of candidates and I have just just loved meeting all of the new folks who want to get involved with Springfield. Um, I would uh recommend Walter or the planning commission and I think Wendy would be fantastic especially with those thoughts about other businesses and other places or um CADC. So, thank you. >> Absolutely. >> I think Wendy has a a little bit to learn yet. So, she may be a little bit early for her. So, I think Walter is the best choice.

13:23 >> Anybody else? Councelor Weather. Um, I agree with the the my colleagues. I think Walter is the right candidate at this time for the planning commission and I would love to see Wendy on CADC. >> I'm getting thumbs up from councelor Stout. Do you want to add anything? >> Guys are awesome. >> I'll also give uh um I also agree. Okay. Um I would argue councelor Mo that I think um both will learn a lot. Um planning commission um will teach you a lot. Um but I think that Walter um would be my pick for planning commission and I would encourage uh Wendy for a seed.

14:10 Okay. And how do we feel about the two term thing? Um remember we always have the option of just asking the staff to flip a coin. It could be dice. It could be rock, paper, scissors. Use the game of your choice. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Thanks, Andy. >> The next up, the next uh item is updates to the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Intergovernmental Agreements or IGAS with Matt Stouter. I was just stalling long enough for Matt to walk up. All right. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Uh my name is Matt Stouter. I'm the environmental services director for Springfield. I also serve as the executive director for the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission. It's a pleasure to be here tonight. I have two foundational agreements to discuss with

14:55 you regarding the MWMC. I'll try to be brief. Um the first is the intergovernmental agreement and the second is the operations and maintenance agreement which outlines outlines how the two cities perform uh maintenance responsibilities and operational responsibilities for the MWMC. Both agreements are in need of update. Uh the IGA was last updated in comprehensively in 2005. Uh the operations and maintenance agreement in 2001. Um MWMC's legal council work closely with the city of Springfield legal council and the city of Eugene legal council on these updates and the county council was also conferred on the IG. The county is party to the IG as are the two cities and the county is not party to the OMA.

15:40 Um the proposed amendments to the IGA are mostly house housekeeping in nature. U at a high level they include updating recital, removing historical references that are no longer needed or used, updating definitions, updating uh using consistent terms through that throughout the IG. Um adding a section for the MWMC board to make a recommendation to the governing bodies uh if expansion area is considered. And I'll make two notes here. one um MWMC we're changing the name to the MWMC board is currently called the MWMC commission which is redundant Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Commission. Um now it's going to be called the MWMC board when referred to as whole. Uh and the second piece is that the uh MWMC it's

16:27 been recognized from the city attorneys and from the cities and from staff that if an expansion to the service area were to occur and were to be brought forward to the cities to um evaluate uh that they would value and hope hopefully want to see MWMC's opinion on whether or not you know to what extent it would impact our infrastructure. So that recommendation has been added. I will also note that this IGA has uh zero to do with any sort of uh expansion. There's if you get into details and you have questions um our service area is defined within the IGA. It's the service area within the two cities and any hauled waste in the form of septage that comes from outside the cities. So this has been in the works for probably three years. Um there are conversations that

17:12 are ongoing externally regarding other communities that's totally separate. Uh this is a strictly mostly housekeeping update. Um >> Matt, could you just clarify those other communities are scheduled to like >> two of those uh Yeah, two of those folks are scheduled to come in January on the 5th. >> Yeah, great. >> Um okay. Um we're changing the or reducing the quorum requirement to a simple majority which is consistent with almost every agency throughout the state. Uh that would be four as long as each of our representatives uh each of our representative jurisdictions are u present. uh as opposed to five right now, which sometimes creates challenges for the commission. Um clarifying the language for when we would conduct a hearing right now is pretty ambiguous. Anybody could request a hearing on any

17:57 topic in any city unrelated to any business that's MWMC. So, this would be related to MWMC's business. Um updating language regarding obligations for termination uh given that the cities are both parties to the MWMC's permit. Uh and then updating our language for dispute resolution. Uh quickly with the OMA, again it's housekeeping edits. Um adding language for the parties to end indemnify one another. Uh updating termination and dispute language. Um considering updating my uh delegated authority for entering into contracts, which is very low. Right now it's 15,000. And so we're going to defer that to the board to set uh to be consistent with other u executives around the the region. Um, right now if I have a

18:42 $15,000 contract for personal services, I have to bring it to the board and it's a uh it it we have a loaded agendas and it takes quite a bit of staff time and it's not very efficient and so uh modernizing that. And then lastly, I'll say we're updating uh language with respect to public records request and asset disposal. So, um, in terms of process, uh, we're here tonight to just let you preview the agreements, uh, ask any questions that you might have. We're scheduled to come back at the next council meeting, um, with a resolution, hoping to put it on consent calendar after talking with, uh, council, legal counsel. Um, it would be January 5th because that's the next meeting. Um, and then we're scheduled to be out before City of Eugene and Lane County for their

19:27 input and agreement in J uh January as well. So, with that, I'm available uh for any questions that you might have. >> Robert, >> thank you and thank you for this and I appreciate the the the comments about what the upcoming next steps are. I just have some curiosities about what the process has been so far. Um, since I'm not involved with WM with MWMC, I don't know like how did was it like staff generated? Did it go through the board? Like what's been the process to get it to this point? >> Um, so we haven't updated the agreement really in 20 years and the OMA has been longer than that. And so there's just things in there that uh mostly there's there's stuff in there that we're no longer doing, procedures we're no longer doing or that don't make sense. So, for example, um Eugene needs to submit their

20:13 budget request to me by April 15th and then we need to be taking that out. So, that doesn't work anymore because of the timeline we're on with budgets. I have to have that information by the 1 of March or we can't get a budget approved given the the multi-jurisdictional process. Um the contractual authority thing has been one where we've had we spent a lot of time on very small contracts and the commission has said um this is taking up business. Can we can we modernize that and maybe remove it tie it to the statute and have a set it by resolution so that it's not it doesn't take an act of three governing bodies to update something every time we want to update it. Um there's several things like that. So mostly it's been ongoing um things that we've been noting as housekeeping edits that have been over the last 20 years. It's like okay now it's time to to move this forward.

21:01 >> And then just my follow-up question is y'all brought this forward. Has it has it and who's our MWMC person? Is it has it Have you all seen it before it comes to us? That's kind of what I was like wanting to know whether it came here first and then to you or you first and then >> Yeah. My apologies. We took this to our board um last two or three weeks ago at our last meeting. >> Yeah. >> All right. Any other questions? Councelor Ste that point uh I'll just have a comment and a question. What the comment is simply that this is an excellent piece of work. I've enjoyed following it and I really appreciate it because as I think you mentioned sometimes what was actually happening was not in alignment with what what was actually written even because what was written just didn't make sense and and I think that all I wouldn't be embarrassed

21:46 at all about asking for the additional spending authority especially because it's entirely reasonable within the other um the other departments and the way that effective utilities run. Uh my question though is does any do any of these changes improve um getting payments from any of the either Springfield or Eugene because those are the two involved groups or is that really a separate discussion from this >> getting I'm not sure I understand the question >> the um when we had a budget hiccup for for example uh because there was a late payment. Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't know that that's going to improve that. That was a issue where EW Webb there's an issue between EW Webb and the CDVG on remitting payment and there's separating out of the fees and and it has to do with billing. I think

22:32 that's nearly being resolved, but I don't think that's going to that's not going to be impacted by this. Um, yeah, Council Weber, very good. Anybody else? You have what you need, Matt? Yes. All right. Thank you. Thank you. So, uh the next item is the housing design initiative code and plan update and we are running a little ahead of schedule. So, feel free to take more time. Like I feel like you guys have it covered. You'll catch us up.

23:17 >> Okay. Did you want to start with anything or >> Yeah, I was just going to reintroduce the project. Um it's just the housing design um initiative. Um we came to you a week ago. We didn't get a chance to finish what was in that work session agenda. So, um we're going to jump right into the questions. I'm going to have Chelsea get to the one climate friendly area question that she didn't get to and then I'll jump into my portion. >> Awesome. Thank you. So, I'm Chelsea Hartman again, a senior planner working on the climate friendly areas project. So, the only other question we have in this topic area is about whether council supports or has concerns with applying a 15 foot maximum building setback requirement for lots with frontage on an arterial in the CFA overlay. I know that's a bit of a mouthful. Um, attachment four in your packet includes

24:02 some maps that show the lots that front on arterials in the CFA overlay for reference. Currently, a 10-ft maximum building setback applies in the downtown mixeduse area, which covers most of the downtown CFA west of 8th Street, but there's a lack of clarity between this standard and the downtown exception area having no setback standard, which basically covers the same area. So, right now, there's currently a discrepancy in the code of whether a maximum building setback applies or not. Um, but why we're bringing this question forward is part of Senate Bill 1537 allows temporary flexibility on certain land use regulations for qualifying residential development. So, you might have heard of this as mandatory adjustments. Um, part of this includes

24:47 allowances for adjustments that mixeduse buildings could become fully residential if the building is set back 20 ft or more from the street regardless of our local requirements for ground flooror commercial. So due to this staff are proposing revising the code standard to be a 15- foot maximum building setback that applies to the lots with frontage on arterials and the CFA overlay. And the intent is to maximize our economic uses on corridors that provide the most expo exposure for these buildings. Um and requiring these buildings to be closer to the street. Um this would help maintain our employment land supply. So, I'll turn it over to the mayor and council for your discussion. And just noting the TAC did discuss this question and their general feedback was broad

25:32 support for removing the maximum building setback requirement. >> Michael, >> I just want to make sure I'm understanding this clearly. So, so 15t set back, 15 foot would be the maximum they could be to the street, but they can be further back or >> that's the furthest they could be from the street. So, it's really forcing buildings to be closer to the street on arerials. >> Okay. >> Yeah, it gets confusing. >> That's what I wanted to make sure that I was understanding that correctly because that's just putting another one of those barriers to developers that makes me a little nervous. But, let me think that through. >> All right. Anybody else? Councelor Buck. >> So, um I think I've had the the benefit of

26:17 hearing this before. Um possibly. Um so the I als as I also understand you mentioned it if we leave it open-ended as it is now. We also leave it open to you know some of those spaces that we'd like to maintain as mixed use could become fully residential. Um and so we kind of leave the door open for that. And so what this this maximum set setback of 15 feet does is well council blackwell you're you're absolutely correct. It it could create a barrier but it also creates a limitation to say if we want mixed use here this protects

27:02 that versus a developer saying well we're going to do a 20ft or 25 ft setback and now it's going to be residential only and that's that's that and there's not much that can be done there. So the maximum does protect the uh the mixed use piece of it. Um and so it's it's kind of one of those where do you lean on it? So I just wanted to point out that that that's one of the key takeaways that I have of this and the real purpose of putting that is there is we want to protect that retail space and that's really what the goal here is. Anybody else? So, under the state under the state law, if you're if you're

27:47 further than 20 feet back, it could be a 100% residential building. >> Yes, that's correct. >> And what is that? A temporary adjustment or is that for all time? >> Uh, it's temporary. So, this is in place until January 2nd, 2032. So, any development between now and then could become fully residential. Yeah. I I don't know that that feels both temporary and permanent all at the same time. >> Yeah. >> Um I I think you know I I think I'm I'm fine with pulling it. Um, right. Like if you think about if you think about the climate friendly area, we've got a lot of residences to fit, you know, fit in there. And there like and when you think about our commercial market right now,

28:34 um I like I don't I'm not sure I see a clear line between um us uh a regulation like that and sort of protecting, you know, uh protecting commercial land. Um, I I think letting people kind of adjust adjust the line's going to help just to help people think through it in a in a more clear way, right? I think the risk with uh mixed use right now that we have is it's very possible that we could be overbuilt in commercial pretty easily and just given a little bit more flexibility always seems like it helps. Okay. Uh, councelor Rodley. >> So, I'm just gonna So, are you saying that you're in favor of the 15 feet or you're in favor of the not >> in favor of no regulation the regulation

29:20 and just saying that let people let people design what they think is going to work. >> That's that's why I was like I'm trying to figure out where everybody is. And I really appreciated um councelor Buck sort of sharing that because I also am like h the mixed juice as we we had a somebody came and reported a while back. it might have been as part of what we move with this project and the barriers that mixed use has. So I think I'm also in favor of just pulling that and not having the regulation in those areas. um see what happens. >> And correct me if I'm wrong, but we have we do have an abundance of commercial like our commercial land banking is not at risk at this point in time,

30:08 right? Not totally at risk. Um there are maybe like one large property downtown that's in our employment land supply that could become fully residential, but it's near Booth Kelly, so I'm not sure how realistic that would be for housing. Anyways, so I think it's okay. Like >> and and I'm just going to note we have a couple folks coming in for what looks like could be the library uh the payroll tax hearing that's at least 30 minutes away. All right. Oh, councelor Buck. Um, I guess I should have clarified that. Um, while I I definitely see the intent of this and I and I feel like it's um I

30:53 definitely appreciate where where staff is going with this trying to kind of protect that so that you know this is kind of a state regulation kind of thing and we wanted to kind of be able to direct it. I also I also feel like the same token developers have have a history in Springfield uh of doing a lot of things that make sense for the community and I think we'll continue to see that. I think that this might be an opportunity to kind of trust them with with projects and say, "Hey, you know, let's talk about projects that make sense." And I think that we'll get that collaboration, especially with the reputation that Springfield currently

31:38 enjoys with our developers, um, as opposed to other areas. So, I I probably would fall into the I like it, but we probably don't need it. Um, but I appreciate like the thought process and why you guys put that in place. You guys wanted to kind of direct where we wanted this to go and and protect that and I I very much appreciate that. Do you have enough direction here? Yeah, I don't see any or more hands coming up. Okay, I think we're ready for the next set of questions. >> Thanks. Thanks, Chelsea. >> Okay. Uh, now we're going to go on to the commercial districts, which I'm sure you're excited to talk about a little pivot. Um, so next we're kind of going

32:23 to give a little bit of background and then we're going to jump into those policy questions. So the first is again why we're proposing some multi-unit standalone housing developments in certain locations. Um we acknowledge that housing opportunities need to be balanced with the policies that we have in place to preserve our land supply for employment uses. This goes into the question that was stated earlier by council about our commercial industrial buildable lands inventory which we have to have per the state that 20ear supply of commercial and industrial land. Um we found that we have a surplus of properties under an acre. So that's um why kind of the emphasis is on those commercial lands under under an acre. We found that busier hightraic streets, especially those arterials, are more viable locations for commercial uses because of visibility. Um but then we

33:10 could have housing on the ground floor to kind of maintain that commercial emphasis um with, you know, housing back behind it on some of those local or collector streets where the emphasis isn't on a commercial or industrial use right along that major arterial main street frontage. Um and again that goes into how housing is more livable and attractive and generally behind or above a commercial use um as opposed to on the ground floor of an arterial street. So um I do want to emphasize this graphic. This is pointing out where we would allow those multi-unit housing as a standalone use on Main Street. So standalone would mean there's no other use with it. It's just multi-unit housing. Um this again would be on properties under an acre that front on a local or collector street. Um, last week

33:56 we also talked about where they'd be allowed as a mixed use. That would be on on Main Street where we would allow it above or behind, but the um graphic here is just where you would allow standalone multi-unit housing. Um, again, in our mixeduse area on East in East Main in the refinement plan, we allow um multi-unit housing, mixed use. Um, it's it's kind of choose your own adventure in that area um because it is already a mixeduse area per that East Main Refinement Plan. Um so how the how we're hoping to encourage some highdensity housing in our commercial districts. We have a a couple of proposals. Uh the first is to apply a minimum density standard in all districts basically where where we would allow housing. Um right now we we don't have that standard. If you're developing mixeduse housing, it would be 15 units

34:42 per net acre. And then if you're proposing just standalone that residential multi-unit housing, it'd be 20 units per net acre. Um, we also are proposing to increase the maximum height in the neighborhood commercial district um to allow fourstory buildings to support housing above commercial uses. Again, we're going to allow mixed use in our neighborhood commercial district. We're also proposing to modify the height step down standard when um a site is adjacent to residential districts. So, right now we have a 50- foot um step back and the proposal will be to 25 ft. Um this enables that more buildable area um without you know limiting the amount of development that can happen. And then we're also proposing to increase the maximum lot coverage in the neighborhood commercial district um from 20 two 20 ft to um higher.

35:28 >> Could you give us an example of a mixeduse building that is 15 units per acre? >> Um I am not sure if the rivet building hit that density. I am not sure, but that would be probably my best guess. >> Do you think it's just above or do you think it's below if it's in like >> I think it might be slightly below. Um, yeah. >> Uh, all right. S we're tagging in Sandy. She She's giving it >> Sandy. >> She Yeah. You want to go with your question? >> You can let Sandy answer and then I have another question. >> Yeah. I don't know what the density is, but it would be higher than 15 units per acre because that's a fairly small lot. And um so I've looked at the density

36:14 before and I believe it's higher than that. >> And and could you give an uh an example of a residential building that is operating at 20 units per acre? >> I'm going to ask all the good questions in this meeting before break. Yeah, I think I mean the um like the the apartments around the Q Street area, the the new ones around there are are in the medium density districts and so those are in like the 14 to 21 dwelling units per acre. >> So really what we're thinking about is like when we're talking about uh how this will be allowed would be like rivet building type buildings to apartments on Q Street type buildings.

36:59 >> Yes. Go ahead. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Sandy. >> Thank you. So, one of my challenges around the minimum density being units per acre is that it doesn't really take into account um like how many bedrooms that are in these units. And so, when I think about increasing density, I'm thinking I'm probably thinking about not like the the rules are in terms of how do we get more people housed? And I know that working on some of the projects we have, and I've appreciated councelor Blackwell bringing it up, that some of them like we went with fewer units to get more bedrooms because that's how families stay housed. So, one of my concerns about this, and I probably won't be able to like be the boss of it, is that when we, you know, the 20 units

37:46 per net acre as a minimum standard could mean that we get like an overabundance of like studios or smaller apartments that then we don't have the the breadth of the market. Um, and again, I that's just it's an opinion. It's a concern that we end up with a whole bunch of smaller things and not enough for like families to live in those areas. And that's all I wanted to say about that. Yeah. >> Do you have an opinion here? >> Um I can acknowledge that something that we brought up at the previous work session was about the minimum lot size. Um and that that can be hard to meet um even with middle housing, even with um single unit dwellings um for this proposal for a mixeduse development or in the commercial district. Um, so it could be more challenging on those

38:32 smaller lots um, absolutely than than we could see on the bigger lots. >> And maybe this isn't a place that we need can settle settle it settle it tonight, but like is there another metric that we can use, you know, um, that would, you know, help get to that question of, you know, I don't know if it's bedrooms per acre, right? But to sort of balance that sense of like in the Rivet building, they're really great if you're, you know, either dual income, no kids, or, you know, uh, still in your singled life, but, you know, giving people credit if they're adding bedrooms. >> Absolutely. We can look into that. >> All right. >> Okay. >> I I just wanted to echo my support for Councelor Rodley's position on that one.

39:18 I think it was very thoughtful and I would fully agree with that. Okay. Um so the first question um is about again supporting that middle housing in the community commercial district on Main Street and South A Street. Um the only residential uses that would be allowed in this case um or mixeduse development with residential uses on Main Street or South A or multi-unit housing on local or collector streets. Um one TC member wondered if we would allow lot consolidation. Um we would allow lot consolidation but we would not allow lot division. And so in that case, we would not want you to take a very large parcel and chop it up into make smaller parcels that you'd be under that one acre. Um, and then the the TAC did not reach consensus on whether or not to allow middle housing in the community commercial district. So again,

40:03 I just kind of mentioned it can be a little hard to hit these density standards if you have really small lots. Um, so I would ask the council to give me some feedback on if they would still like the developers to have the option to try for middle housing or if they would want the emphasis to be on multi-unit housing. book. >> Can you can you help me out with um your general sense of of the lot inventory that we have? Do they do they do we tend to have more of the smaller lots or do we tend to have the larger lots that that would lean towards um the you were talking about? >> Yeah, I would say that most of the lots are smaller. Um, I think uh, attachment five was a great visual so you could see

40:48 all the lots that would be under an acre um, and would be developable on the different segments of Main Street. Um, versus we have very few lots that are over an acre on Main Street that aren't developed or are are buildable. So, I would say the majority of them are smaller and going to be under an acre. Um, I do think being really clear with folks that we do not want to allow them to buy big lots and sort of take, you know, and and sort of strip them down to smaller lots. That's a really important distinction. We're trying to really weave this uh conversation between the ability to add housing and the ability

41:34 to sort of balance economic lands, right? So we because we're opening it up on one end, we really have to protect those employment lands and I Okay, so I don't know that we answered your question yet. Do you support not allowing middle housing in? >> So again, we were talking about that density, right? If in this instance, we would be more for that higher density. We'd be emphasizing we want you to build more units versus middle housing. You know, we're thinking about those town houses, duplexes, triplexes. Sometimes, you know, the conversation that I've had internally with staff is that this is prime real estate land. Again, most of the time it's been a commercial or industrial use. So then if we allow residential, is that the highest and best use of those properties for to just get a couple of units or do we want to

42:21 emphasize the highest and best use of these properties is higher density housing people. Thank you. Go ahead, councelor Ro. I'm going to be so messy on this because I think this totally gets to the point of what I was trying to say earlier. Um, and I I think that, you know, part of our job is to balance that highest and best use with Springfield and how people live and work here. Um, and so that's that's where I wrestle with it a lot is it'd be really easy to just say, "Let's go highest and best use. Let's plug a bunch of studios and onebedrooms in downtown." But is that I mean I see that as really changing the way maybe our downtown is being experienced and I'm for some of that. I also could see some sweet cottage

43:07 clusters that a family could live in forever or seniors could live in or you know so so that's where I'm like and I know we have to get to a decision and I'm just like sitting here but that's where I'm I'm thinking highest and best use. Yes. also livability and how people experience Springfield and want to be here. >> Council Blackwell, >> um I I agree with that and I I really support the variety of housing. I rather see variety and have uh developers will tend to choose highest and best use just because that's affects their bottom line. And so I again I'm not I don't really believe in putting that restriction. I want to see what what develops. And I I again I just think that having a variety of homes and and sizes and bedroom counts is important

43:54 and not just end up with highrises that are studio apartments. >> Okay. Oh, anybody else? Councelor Weber, >> I agree. I think that if we're making a lot of changes here and I I it kind of feels like we need to to stop and think about how much change we want to make right away. Like maybe test some of it in these other areas, see what what plays out, but kind of leave the other ones alone for now. That's kind of where I'm at. >> Councelor Booker. I think that um you know I I'm in agreement with my colleagues here. I I guess I will say

44:41 that um I'm in favor of allowing the um metal housing because I think that the lots that we're talking about aren't the majority of lots um based on on lot sizes and lot inventory. And so I think that if we said nope, we're going to not not allow any mental housing in that section, um I think it it limits us in a way that we we don't need to limit ourselves just because I think those smaller lots are going to tend to gravitate towards smaller units. But the lots that would allow for the opportunity to put some middle housing in there, I think we need to leave that

45:27 so that that opportunity is there. I think what we have is going to determine what goes in there and I think we just need to let it be. All right. What is the risk if we allow middle housing in there and we don't try to drive density that we get to a point that we consume all of our residential land and then we can't go back and ask the state for more residential land because we have to get to a certain amount of how like phys like the physics of this thing have to work and I don't know if this is a legal question or not but like you know if if we just sort of our instincts to let people build right but we could not hit our unit coverage that we're actually looking for like what happens at that point. >> I don't I don't know if Chelsea wants to

46:14 cover this one. She is the one um who is addressing our housing capacity analysis. >> Yeah, I think it is tough having some of these earlier pieces of conversations about housing without getting into our full housing capacity analysis that we will be doing soon. And as part of that, we will have to look at types of housing we're planning for, the characteristics, and then locations will be a big part. So, it's the number of units, and then where are we going to put them? That'll be our whole big community conversation that we're having in 2026. So, I think this could be a piece of that puzzle, we're probably based on how the rules are written with the state looking at a UGB expansion regardless of how much we increase density because we can only do that to a certain extent within the

46:59 rules. And then we need to look at adding more land to our urban growth boundary. So I think don't know exactly, but I think we're just in a tough place with the way the rules are written now. >> Well, don't worry. This this short session is going to be here soon, and I'm sure we'll get a whole new set of rules that will change uh change what what's happening. And and B, do do you have any kind of thoughts here about like how do we think about that long-term risk? No, I think um I would just second what Chelsea was talking about until you really know what that inventory looks like. It would be hard to know what you could do with the state. >> Yep. Okay. Um so I think then we're back to this question of right being like we continue to want to be focused on as much you know flexibility and development as possible knowing that you

47:45 know finding something that financially pencils is really an important task. Um and then we'll deal with these kind of longer term issues as we get to them. Right. Thank you. Okay. I um I'm kind of going to skip the height question about neighborhood commercial um unless there's a question about that. Just saying that we're going from a 20 foot tall buildings to um to 50 foot tall, which would be about a four-story mixeduse building. Um and we also increase the lot coverage from 35% to 60%. Just wanted to cover that real quick. Um the other thing that we are proposing is that step down standard. Um so again this would um to describe it we currently require that the maximum height of buildings step down to more no more than 35 to 50 feet on the portion of a property that is within 50 ft of an

48:32 adjacent R1 or R2 district. So you can kind of see the visual on the left that is what we have currently and then on the right you can see what it would be. So 50 feet within that that's where we would reduce the height. Um and it's going from 50 feet down to 25 feet. Um so that's the proposal. just kind of shows a little bit more um emphasizing that you could build more units um on those upper floors. Um construct buildings without a step down by moving the entire building. Again, some developers would say, "I'm going to move the entire building so that I'm not within that 50 foot or 25 foot setback because I know I'm going to reduce the amount of units that I have." Um so on to this question. Um in the commercial districts, uh do you support um this allowance to uh reduce the

49:17 height from 50 ft to 25 ft from the property line? And this would apply, I'm sorry, to the community commercial, the mixeduse residential, the mixeduse commercial, the mixed use employment, and the Booth Kelly mixeduse districts. >> I think did you hit all the zoning types in there? Go ahead, Council Buck. >> All right. Um, so, um, you got some feedback from planning commission on this. Can you share what the planning commission gave you guys? >> They were in favor of this. >> I'm think I'm in favor. I think we're I'm seeing some head nods here. I think we're in favor of this. >> Awesome. I'm going to move ahead to the next question then. Um, so this question is a little bit more meaty. This is

50:03 about mixeduse buildings with residential uses or multi-unit housing when they abut in industrial districts. So you may remember last week I came to you kind of about where we could put some compatibility standards in here. Um in this instance we're looking at additional setbacks, some screening and landscaping standards and some reduced height standards. Um and all this was described in the council briefing memo, but I'll try to touch on them real quick. Um, basically when a mixeduse building with a residential use or multi-unit housing would abut a light, medium industrial, heavy industrial or special heavy industrial district, we would propose an interior side and rear yard setback of 20 ft and that the setbacks could be reduced by 50% if you um installed a masonry wall or decorative wall. Um, when a mixeduse building with residential uses or multi-unit housing abutz industrial district, the building height could be

50:49 reduced to 50 feet. Um and then again I noted in the council briefing memo that there were several refinement plan policies um where they tried to address compatibility that includes downtown east Maine um gateway and mid Springfield. So some of those areas that we were in particular concerned about residential in close proximity to industrial. Um so based on that information I'm looking for council's guidance on on some ways we could potentially address this. Um, we could rely on the proposed code changes. Again, that reduced height, those additional setbacks between um, industrial and a residential use. We could increase the required setbacks and buffering. Again, I said 20 ft. When you're on the side or the rear, we would have a um, a 20 foot setback. We could continue to explore some options for

51:34 compatibility. I'm hoping to come back to council at the first week in February to discuss more about those compatibility issues. So, if you can't make a decision tonight, that's okay. Um, and then we could also just consider not allowing residential uses in proximity to industrial. >> Um, I think I'm comfortable with the mason, you know, wall as a way to reduce setbacks. Um, castle black wall. >> Yeah. On here, I I I'm fine with A. So, the ones that you suggested, I'm I'm comfortable with. Again, that kind of reduces adding more and more layers to to development in that area. So, I I support option A. council stone. >> I I think there's a a conversation that we also have to have and I'm not forgive me this is a bit sloppy. Um for example,

52:19 in areas that were classically like just vacant land and then they built uh heavily in residential and then there's industrial traffic. There's been industrial traffic for there for 40 years. All of a sudden then there's a complaint from the neighbors that they're concerned about there's their health or otherwise. I you know I am I share these concerns but I also share the fact that but the industry's been there for 40 years and that's what's creating the jobs in the community. So I think there's a there's a careful balance there and I and I think even outside of um the the long list of uses where we require a certain permitting. I think there's an additional question. I mean my car every day I work right next to um a big lumber mill. It's covered with sawdust to just covered which is not a bad thing. I mean, I'm not

53:04 complaining about it, but it's just like, is that the right thing for our homeowners st right next to it? So, I hate to say it, but it's like there's a certain amount of risk that the developer of residential property takes on there. And I don't quite know how we're going to handle that reasonably without frankly just having a lot of upset citizens all of a sudden buy a new house that's develops next to an industrial property. So, I just I just wanted to raise that as my concern. Councelor Weber, >> I have some concerns around environmental impact to um being that close to industrial use. >> I personally would like to see us explore uh seed a little bit just see what other options are out there. >> Okay. >> Anybody else?

53:49 >> Um I think the I think the I think the the conversation needs to continue. The question that I really have with a setback and maybe and and maybe additional information helps me here is I keep coming back to the sound piece of it, right? and and maybe maybe to councelor Stout's point that uh the air quality issue is an issue like the water quality overlay is pretty well governed by a different uh a different piece but how do we know like I get that a mason wall is a you know a good example of a sound barrier but how do we know that the setback at 20 ft is enough to address that sound concern and again like the part of the community that you know I represented for a long time really this was a huge this was a huge

54:36 issue do and it was all related to sound and the way I'm thinking about those homes is they were more than 20 ft away like away from where where the s sound emission was and I think councelor Stout has a really good point and I know we're going to kind of give you direction and let you sort of research it and come back to it is that um when you have um when we let the city develop right we'll see a point when you know users on the industrial side had been there for a very long time but When like when residential development happens and then it's sold two or three times, we will have our constituents come to us and really that relationship in that zone is going to flip from being pointed towards the commercial development uh towards

55:22 the residential development because that's the that's the most impactful thing that people see in their lives and I don't know how to balance that yet. So I think it's sound is a big question for me. I think is the air quality question and you know maybe the answer is you know is sort of El Rapa and then more broadly this question about what like how do we diffuse disputes? >> Excellent. Great questions and I hope I hope to bring it back to you in the first week in February to discuss it some more. >> Do you have one other quick question you can squeeze in? They're all there I'm sure people folks coming in really like are going to enjoy going. Let's see if we can slip one more. >> I would really like to talk about um the East Main Refinement Plan because I think this one is is quite important. Um

56:08 you may remember that I talked about this area in particular is a mixeduse area already. Um the issue is that we have some standards that are not very clear. We say that this the development could meet the either the R2 or R3 standards, which can be kind of confusing to a developer um when they're looking at what that looks like. So, I just want to talk about kind of what our options could be here. we could clarify um that the applicant can decide between the R2 or R3 standards. This isn't really a change from what we have right now. Um it so that's a pro. It would can continue as it is. Um but it still makes it complex. It doesn't really address the complexity issue of how do you apply under those standards. Um option B would apply the same development standards that I've been talking about those um mixeduse standards in the community commercial district. Um this would allow for higher densities in the than um the

56:55 R2 or R3 district standards right now. Um but it may not be consistent with the standards that are there in the refinement plan which are for lower densities. Um and then option C, we could apply the mixeduse commercial district standards. Um again, a pro is that this simplifies the plan designation. It's already a mixeduse district. Um, but a con is that it it could not be consistent with the original standards and then you're going to have to apply the design standards of the mixeduse commercial district to this area in particular. Um, so if council has any thoughts, this would really help me help me and my team out to try to decide how can we balance these needs in this area. >> So before we get into that, I know we got a lot of folks that are looking to testify for a public hearing that we've got next. If you did not see it, there

57:40 are cards over on that uh on that table. So, if you want to testify, you need to fill out a card, give it to Allison, and then when we'll get to the hearing here shortly. Uh, any anybody want to jump in? Go ahead, Cer Buck. So, I'm curious to hear a little bit more about some of the um feedback you've gotten from developers because in that section in particular on that east on that um north side of Main Street, there's a lot of opportunity for develop development that's not happening um less so on the south side. But I'm curious as to what feedback you're getting that devel what do developers want to put there

58:25 that they're currently feeling like the code doesn't allow or they're shying away because there there's got to be some barrier for why that's not being developed. >> Yeah, I would imagine um one thing was the density. So Cherry Springs was just developed right off of 48th um and actually that area was developed with lower densities in mind. um and they actually reszoned it to mixeduse residential so that they could meet the the lower density standards in the mixeduse residential district as opposed to trying to meet the density standards in the R2 or R3 district which is what we have right now. Um so I would say when it comes to housing density is a real concern in that area if it can be met. Um I think we have a lot of different businesses in that area, a lot of mix of uses. We're seeing so much new

59:10 development when it comes to commercial in that area. So, I think allowing again that continued mix of uses, but allowing the flexibility for the developer to choose is going to be really important. Applying density standards to the mixed use of the mixeduse commercial district could be a barrier to development. Again, they could be a little stricter than what we currently could allow. >> Uh, could you flip to the next slide so we can look at the pros and cons again? Thank you. >> Councelor Rodley, >> you mentioned something that's not a part of this. Um, you said clarify, it says here, clarify that the applicant can decide R2 or R3. that doesn't include R1, right? So, um I I I mean I totally understand the I I want to keep working on the complexity issues, but I don't want to try to tackle the complexity by creating extra

59:57 barriers, right? And I think I'm hearing that we're all like we're all on board like we want to we don't want to come out of here making it harder just to make it easier. We want to make it easier to make it easier. So, I think I'm kind of sticking with a and hoping we can continue to kind of if there are some specific things that we can address that develops are saying this is getting in the way or we don't understand, maybe we could tackle that, but I'd rather not just lay on a bunch of stuff that's going to make it harder. else. Oh, councelor Blackwell, >> just real quick to council Rodley's point, does that mean like option B kind of takes that from, you know, what you have set now, but allowing um it allows for the higher densities. So, that

1:00:43 solved that density problem that you were just speaking about earlier. That one in particular kind of >> is kind of in line with what we have now, although it allows that density to increase. Yeah, if if you did apply um B, it would technically it would allow those higher densities. Yes. Um but yeah, it could it could just create some more restrictions on basically the type of development as opposed to right now it's pretty much again like choose your own adventure. You could be completely commercial, you could be completely residential, you could be a mixeduse building. Um if you go with option B, it's a little bit more you're you're pretty much going to be a mixeduse building. Anyone >> else? All right. Do you have enough direction on this one? >> I believe so. Um, again, I'm hoping to come back to you guys um the first week

1:01:28 in February with to address some of those compatibility issues that we didn't get to tonight. So, I think it'll be a really great discussion and thank you so much. >> You are tearing up quite a uh teeing up quite a bit of uh really complicated housing questions. So, thanks for your patience with us. Before we adjourn, um we do have seats up front and then if you know if you're if you're Springfield City staff, there are some staff chairs that are over here that you could potentially sit into. Um we are we are adjourned with the work session. We will probably start the regular session uh special regular session in a couple of minutes, just long enough to get organized. >> I'm going to call this special regular session to order with roll call. Van Gordon here. Councelor Weber >> here. >> Councelor Mo

1:02:13 >> here. >> Councelor Rodley >> here. >> Councelor Brockwell >> here. >> Councelor Buck >> present. >> And councelor Stout >> here. >> All right. Excellent. Uh could you call the first item, please? >> Yes. We have one item tonight. It is the public hearing payroll tax resolution. Nathan Bell is here for this item. >> Right. Uh good evening, mayor and council. Uh for the record, Nathan Bell, finance director. Uh the item in front of you this evening is a request to conduct a public hearing uh and to adopt not adopt a resolution directing staff to develop a payroll tax for uh council review and deliberation. And one of the things I want to do is highlight um this resolution does not implement a payroll

1:02:59 tax uh nor does it contain any of the details of what that payroll tax would look like. rather it formalizes kind of what led up to and then your decision to direct staff to begin the process of implementing a payroll tax. Um if this passes this evening, uh we'll begin the process of preparing those materials to bring back to you uh in a work session probably in late January or uh early February. Uh and with that, I'm going to turn it over to you uh for any questions. >> All right, questions before we open open the hearing. Okay. So, I've got a couple questions. So, if um Sorry, let me check my other side here. Anybody got direct questions? >> No.

1:03:44 >> So, right now when we think about what we're doing here, the only thing the resolution says is city manager like after all this work, we want you to p pursue uh implementing a public uh a payroll tax. Is that correct? So, it doesn't specify the rate. >> It doesn't specify any details. um that will begin after this resolution is passed and that'll come back to you in a work session where you'll have an opportunity to shape those details. >> Okay. So I think the other question that I have is if you think about the timeline from implementation, could you talk more from the moment we say go tonight to potentially when that would be implemented? How long are we talking at that point? Um, if you were to say go this evening, um, best case scenario is to have

1:04:31 something that could potentially be in place and active beginning uh, January 1st of 2027. So if so, I know there's kind of two portions to this, right? The first portion is we're we're uh, passing the ordinance itself and then there's a portion where you're working with the business community and the payroll folks to potentially implement that. Yes. >> So would our work would go through the first couple of quarters of next year, >> right? >> Uh yes, it would. >> Okay. And then you would have to have to hit a January 1st, 2027 date, you would have to have the next six months to really do the staff work with business, the business community, the payroll folks, that kind of thing. >> Correct. >> Okay. Okay.

1:05:17 >> Mayor, could I add just one more procedural point? Also, when the um council considers the payroll tax, it'll be new municipal code and an ordinance and there's more opportunity for public involvement at that point as well based on the information that you've given in the work session and in the regular sessions. >> Okay. So, by like we're going to get into this. I know there's big questions about the library, so please be patient with us as we kind of work work through this. So, by plan tonight, we're not scheduled really to talk about the library. And I'm gonna point it I'm gonna switch over to Neil who's pinching for the city manager here in a second. >> So Neil, I know people are concerned here about um uh library reductions. Could you talk maybe a little bit about

1:06:02 the process for how the community would evaluate those library reductions? >> Yeah, so the as the council's been very clear, um the budget process which starts in May is where the budget decisions will be made. So, as you mentioned, there's no decision tonight on any library cuts as part of this discussion, but as the council works towards their May uh discussions of the budget, those three nights where the public has access to those discussions, that's when those decisions will likely be made. >> Okay. So, I got a thing to read for the public hearing. I've got names to call up. We'll get through a plan. Um I want like I just kind of want to talk through this piece so that if it helps you formulate

1:06:48 your thoughts. The way that the budget process really works is the city manager proposes a budget. Then we have a budget committee hearing which is the public outreach portion of that and then the city council usually adopts it uh potentially in you know I don't know usually it's late June. We always think it's going to be faster than it actually is but usually it's potentially late June. So, as we work through this tonight, um I know you guys are going to have a lot of questions. We're going to take all your input. Um we're going to talk about specifically some issues around the payroll tax. You may hear us talk come back and talk about uh library funding, but a lot of this is really going to, you know, really may be around, hey, this question is really a question that happens in through a different instrument around the around the budget committee, which is designed for the community to evaluate the

1:07:34 options and uh uh the options and the the levels of service that we're getting for our tax dollars. Okay. Anybody else have other questions? Mary Bridget, did I get that right? >> That's correct. Oh, >> I passed. Go ahead, Councelor St. Um, Mr. Mayor, may I propose a point of order? Given the sheer number of testimony, amount of testimony that we have tonight, I would move that we limit to public testimony to two minutes per speaker as opposed to our traditional three. Is there any is there a second to that? Do you want to put it in a form? >> Second that. >> Okay. I think we're ready to disc to discuss this. So really the quas

1:08:23 was that a question or was that a motion? >> I would ask the parliamentarian what the appropriate one technically it was a motion. >> Yeah, I think you have on the floor now a motion in a second to limit public testimony to two minutes per person or this evening. >> Blackwell, >> I guess I have a question. How many cards do we have? I know there's a lot of people in here, but they might just want to open. >> Um, I've got 15 cards. Um, do we have any hands online? >> No hands as of yet. >> Okay. So, maybe we pick up Usually we pick up another couple online as we go. Um, we do have a schedule you scheduled next meeting. I believe that is supposed to start at 7:15.

1:09:08 >> Seven. >> Oh, see there you go. Well, >> that's what I >> Please be patient. We're going to work through all this stuff. We'll get you guys in a second. All right. So, any thoughts, discussions, opinions? Councelor Buck. >> Um, you know, I think that one of the things that's really helpful is is hearing um what the community is saying and 15 cards seems manageable at 3 minutes. I I I withdraw my motion. >> Withdraw my second. >> All right. So, let me offer an alternative about what we could do here that we've used successfully is we could just simply head discuss whether or not

1:09:54 and do a little bit of a check-in in say 30 minutes and see how we're doing. Is that something people are and that is something? Okay, we're back to you guys. So, right now, here's what's going on. We have 15 cards. We're probably going to pick up a couple of people online as we go. Um, so what we're going to do is we're because we have another item, we're just going to kind of manage the time and check in about where we where we're at at, you know, and in the first probably 30 minutes. Um, before I open the hearing, um Oh, I think we're good. So, um, I'm going to read some instructions and then what we're going to do is we've got two seats up here. Um, I'm going to call people up two at a time and then

1:10:41 then you'll have your three minutes. So, we'll go one person, the next person, the next set the next set of people. All right. Before we before we begin the public hearing this evening, I'd like to take a moment to outline the protocol and expectations for public comment. First, I want to thank everyone for being here and for taking the time to participate. Public input is an essential part of our decision-making process, and we value the opportunity to hear from the community tonight. Tonight's public comment period is specifically dedicated to the topic of the public hearing, which is the payroll tax resolution. I I ask that the remarks stay focused on the item before the council. This helps us make a clear and productive record to ensure that everyone's time is respected. If you wish to speak and have not signed up yet, please complete a

1:11:27 request to speak card and handed to the city recorder. Speakers will be called in the order which they signed up. Once your name is called, please come forward to the microphone, state your name for the record, and then begin your comments. Also, please state the location of the city. You can state your address. You can state your ward. You can state the general description. We sort of just keep track of what part of the city you're from or if you're from a different part part of the community. If you uh each speaker will have or if you are online, please raise your virtual hand. Each speaker will have 3 minutes of time to address the council. We ask that all speakers and audience members maintain a respectful conduct through throughout the hearing. This means no interruptions, no applause, no verbal

1:12:12 reactions, positive or ne negative, while others are speaking. This ensures a safe and fair space for every participant. Offensive language or disordered behavior is not permitted. With these guidelines in place, we look forward to hearing from each one of you. And I'm going to open the public hearing. The first two folks that I have are I have Cali Aland and Ava Cronin.

1:13:18 All right, I think we're ready. >> Okay. >> Good evening, mayor and city councilors. My name is Callie Acklland. I'm a resident of Ward 4, and I'm here today as a community organizer with Safe Springfield Library to talk about the payroll tax. Save Springfield Library is working to inform Springfield residents about the proposed library budget cuts and to secure long-term funding for the library. The Save Springfield Library Group is incredibly grateful to have the support of the League of Women Voters of Lane County, Lane County History Museum, Junction City Historic Society, Lane Library League, Springfield Eugene Tenant Association, United Academics of UO, the Oregon Chapter of National Writers Union, and Kitty Piery, former Eugene Mayor and State Representative, all of whom have written letters to city council asking that you take the

1:14:03 necessary steps to maintain current library funding. Each letter is available on our website safesprfield library.org and I will provide copies to the city recorder. I understand how delicate and difficult this budget situation is. I understand that the city cannot operate in the red so the budget has to be balanced somehow. The payroll tax is a solution right in front of you. When you vote on the payroll tax rate early next year, I hope we can count on you to set a rate that fully funds the library. Many of your constituents are begging you to not cut the library's budget, and I hope you'll choose to listen to the people instead of corporate interests. A minuscule increase to the proposed payroll tax rate does not add any additional administrative burden to businesses. The Chamber of Commerce's suggestion for the

1:14:48 library to explore fresh, innovative operating models simply won't be possible if the library is struggling to operate with below the minimum necessary staffing for the population it serves. We are asking you to please support the people and their library. Please do not bow down to corporate demands. Please set a payroll tax rate that fully funds the library. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Hi, my name is Eva Cronin. I actually live in Eugene, but I have worked in Springfield um as a staff person with Head Start of Lane County. And during that time, I um coordinated with the librarians here. I always thought the library here was much more friendly to kids than the Eugene library, I have to

1:15:33 say. Um, and the librarian was so helpful and wanted to do a program where which would help bring in Head Start families. And if you don't know about Head Start, we serve low-income families. And low-income families um are typically working one or two jobs, maybe even more. And if they were able to be here, this room would be packed with them. So, I I feel like I'm representing lots of families that would love the library. I love the library when I was a kid. It made me It is certainly a part of who I am, and I think I came out to be a pretty good human. Um, democracies require libraries, and to think that that we would even consider cutting funding to libraries is an abom abonomination to me. I didn't say that

1:16:19 right. I just can't believe it. Um, books are so important and it's important for people of all ages and there's so many services that the libraries offer and I think they should be tripled and quadrupled in services uh to reach everybody in your in your city and in your county. So, I'm here to say yes to a payroll tax that will fully fund the library. And thank you for your time. >> Thank you. The next two cars I have are Jessica Winny and Elliot Harwell.

1:17:06 Hello, council persons. I am Jessica Winens um and I live in W 2. Um I'm here to support uh to speak in support of the Springfield Public Library and specifically in support of moving forward with the work on the payroll tax. This payroll tax is important to fund at a high enough rate so that library can continue operating at its current service level. The increase needed is minimal and it puts the payroll tax far below the payroll tax of neighboring Eugene. I think that not approving the payroll tax at a rate that funds our current services including the library is shortsighted and I feel passionate about the role of the library in our community. I'm in a unique position to do that as I am responsible for a college library. Um, and from that work I see every day how libraries make an easy target because the work of librarians is not well understood. The resources and education that are provided are not always highly visible

1:17:52 and the view there's not always the value the important value of the library as a space for the public. I believe that there's some in what we've seen so far coming out from the city and suggestions that there's evidence of a lack of understanding of the importance of a library and how much it contributes to our community. I'm also here as a regular library user and the parent of a 10-year-old very proud uh library card holder. Um I really am proud to live in Springfield. I've seen a lot of growth since we moved here in 2016. It feels like a different town to me. I don't want to live in a town that doesn't have a well-funded library. I don't not want that to be where my kid grows up. Um, and I think that we have a way in front of us where we can move forward with the payroll tax at a wellunded rate so that that doesn't have to be the possibility for my kid and the other kiddos in this

1:18:38 room tonight. >> Thank you, Elliot. >> Uh, hello. My name is Elliot Harwell. I live in Ward 3. Uh, I was recently appointed to the Springfield budget committee, but tonight I am speaking only on behalf of myself. Um supporters of the library, myself included, have come out tonight in force because we recognize that the proposed payroll tax is the last best hope of funding our library fully. The mayor's fiscal task force also understood the critical importance of the payroll tax uh for our city's fiscal future. That's why it was convened. That's the work that they did. But the businesses that sat on the fiscal task force explicitly argued for a payroll tax level that would necessitate the city make cuts because,

1:19:23 and I'm quoting here, one of those businessmen said that the city should also feel the pain. A great deal of the conversation around the payroll tax has been focused on listening to these business interests and not small businesses, but on large corporations, regional and national. But the payroll tax is only paid half by businesses. The other half is drawn from the salaries of the men and women who live and work in Springfield. And those Springfieldians who were not represented on this fiscal task force are here tonight to represent themselves. And we are saying that we expect the payroll tax to fill the $500,000 hole in the library's budget. Increasing the payroll tax by 0.01%

1:20:08 would would result in the payroll projected tax revenue increase of $400,000, which is most the way there. Choosing to accept the payroll tax at the proposed level is choosing to fire three librarians, close the library an extra day, and cut $89,000 from the books. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Uh, the next two are Rebecca Fer and Paul Baker.

1:20:53 >> Hello everyone. My name is Rebecca Felure. I live in Ward 1. Um, I moved to Springfield about two and a half years ago. I've never spoken at one of these things. I've never been to one of these things, but the library is important enough to me that I want to be here tonight. Um, the library provided me a place that was safe when I first moved here, and it was really impactful in me choosing Springfield as a community that I was going to live in. And I have um participated. I am a regular library user. I'm there almost every day. I really feel the weight of the library already not being open on Sundays, but to close the library another day with proposed uh $500,000 cuts, that just it seems totally wild to me. Um so I I um the library is a space that I've been

1:21:38 able to build a lot of community um particularly around crafting and going to crafting activities, meeting my friends there to craft and being able to grow community in this area. Um, I fully support a payroll tax that fully funds the library at current levels or even higher because our community needs this and truly benefits from having the library here. Um, that's all I have to share. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Well, Paul Baker, live on Third Street from Springfield. First of all, I'd like to compliment the city council on only spending 10 minutes on whether whether to reduce our speaking time from three minutes to two minutes. Uh I want to talk not necessarily about

1:22:24 increasing revenue, but how revenue is likely to decrease. Uh Donald Trump and his stormtroopers are raiding cities all over the country and I've got friends in Chicago and Portland and they're they're saying it's causing significant economic difficulties and I think it's spring counties that include Salem to some uh counties northn northwest including ones right near Portland have suggested to the state that they pass laws that prevent ice from basically breaking the law. And I think I think the Springfield should city council for should ask for those laws. I think the the city of Springfield has

1:23:10 about 60,000 people. From looking at uh census data, I think there's about 10 to 12,000 Hispanics and another 2,00 to 2500 with dark skins, largely Asian. And uh I think a possible solution is to have the the city, the school school board, and the police work together to try to limit ice damage. And uh the mayor said there was going to be a messaging system to let people know of weather emergencies and that kind of thing. That message system could also be used if ordinary people report where ice is and it's transferred through the city's messaging system. that would help quite a bit. The schools when I remember

1:23:57 I was a antivietnam activist in high school and uh much of the activism was among males who were going to be drafted. I was one of the last 300 people in the country drafted and we did a real good job of uh creating a lot of uh antivietnam uh sentiment. I think high school students in Springfield schools who are often citizens but their parents and grandparents are not citizens can be organized. They should organize themselves. The school the school board the schools should support uh students to organize themselves. Thirdly, I think the police should track where ICE if Iis ICE people are staying in Gateway, they should develop sources

1:24:43 at the different hotels to report where they're staying. allow activists to trace the cars, that type of thing. If we don't do something like this, we're going to lose a hell of a lot more people. We're going to use lose a hell of a lot more potential of payroll tax and uh we're going to cause a lot of misery for people who don't need it. That's it. >> Thank you. The next person is Rachel Hullbrook and Michelle Tierney.

1:25:36 Hi, I'm Rachel Hullbrook. Uh been a resident of Springfield for about nine years now. Um this is the longest I've ever lived in one place in my whole life. Uh I live just uh between here in Pioneer Parkway. Um, my all three of my kids have been utilizing the library and our public schools and our roads and all of the things that I'm really proud of living in Springfield. Uh, because of things like our library and our museum, the Wilders Theater, things like that that uh I feel like we mostly do a very good job of providing these things for our community. I've talked to a lot of people who utilize the library uh during the ice storms um when they had to come in because of the fires or because of

1:26:21 the smoke, heat, ice storms and things like it's such an essential part of our community. Um we can't defund this. This is something that if anything, uh, like was already said, the fact that it's not open 7 days a week, the fact that it, you know, closes earlier, um, those are things I'd like I'd like to see services expanded if anything. Um, I want to say thank you to all of the organizers who made everybody aware of this happening and got everybody out here today. And I want to say thank you to everybody who made it here today. and also encourage everybody to keep showing up uh not just for this but you know we need to keep track of all of the things that are happening in our town and this is a big part of what

1:27:08 democracy is. We vote for people but then we need to show up and make sure that everything is continuing according to what the wishes of the people really are. Um >> yeah, that's all I really have to say. Thanks. Thank you, >> council members, mayor. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm speaking for myself as a um citizen, but I do work at the Springfield Library. So, I'm here to share a different perspective for what our library does for our community. Not in statistics, but in human terms. So, most people already understand that every day at the library, my job is to help people find information, access services, and navigate technology. But the most important work I do is something less

1:27:53 visible. I treat people with dignity, respect, and genuine care. These points of connection matter more than most people realize. Every day, people come to the library caring a lot. Stress, fear, loneliness, frustration. Some are overwhelmed parents. Some are teenagers looking for a safe space. Some are seniors trying to stay connected. And some are neighbors who lived on the margins of society and who feel unseen. Over the past couple years in particular, there's been a steep increase in people from all walks of life who come in anxious or frazzled. And I take time to acknowledge their feelings to slow things down to reassure them that they're not alone and that we will figure things out together. These people range from everyday people to

1:28:38 people experiencing extreme hardship. The assistance I provide isn't just about printing a document or finding a resource. It's about dignity, restoring a sense of calm, and reminding them of their own worth. The Springfield Library is one of the few places where people are treated with true and consistent kindness. It is my honor to serve, and it is my honor to look people in the eye, offer a warm welcome, often greeting them by their first name. I offer a human connection that many rarely experience elsewhere, much less through their local government. That connection, those small moments of empathy have real impact. They help people feel grounded. They help them feel human. They help them feel valued and like they truly belong to this

1:29:23 community. The Springfield Library does the quiet work of listening, caring, and showing the respect that keeps people tethered to hope and possibility. We constantly hear feedback that Springfield exemplifies welcome and exudes warmness. If we cut our library resources, we don't just lose books, programs, or computers. We lose those opportunities for human connection. We lose a place where people feel safe, seen, and supported. The library is an investment, one that pays dividends every single day in the well-being of Springfield residents. It supports mental health. It reduces isolation. It helps people face the challenges in their lives with a little more confidence and a lot more kindness. I can't fix the city's budget, but I can

1:30:09 tell you this. The work that we do at the library strengthens and helps fix the fabric, the fabric of our community. Thank you for your time and your commitment to our community. >> Thank you. The next two people are Manuel Gonzalez and Carol Wilds. Uh, could you hit the the uh unmute button? It should go green. Perfect. >> I see it. Hey, good. Uh, my name is Manuel. I am a Springfield resident. Been living in Springfield, Oregon for

1:30:54 over 18 years now. I work live and grow have grown here. Uh I've used the library for a long time. I uh I'm honestly disappointed that I have to be here and really saddened that very basic things have to be spelled out for y'all. Um, I know that there was people who filled this council here yesterday, also not yesterday, recently also spelling basic things out for y'all. And I'm just here to say step up or step down. And I mean that. I don't know under what legacies you're all running because I don't know y'all. I don't know who represents 42nd and

1:31:41 Main Street. Do you mind raising your hand if you're on my word? Is that you, Sean? >> No, it's the it's the wine. But keep going. We'll come back to it. >> Well, point is, uh, you're not all very well known in the community because you all just don't really capture my interest or represent my values. Really, um, the fact that I'm here saying save the library means you failed. The question should be, how do we fund the library? How do we expand services? I am a service worker. I am probably more well known to locals uh than you all and I'm just not content

1:32:26 with your leadership. I think that it lacks a whole lot. The fact that you know there's not is is was there folks in this council that were part of this payroll initiative to fund the library? I hope so. I don't see a whole lot of coverage on it at on any city pages and I really don't care what the process to give some platform to this uh funding of essential services is. You'll need to do better and put this out in the public because every single Springfield person should care about this and you should care about this and this is the this is what you should be running for. Uh Sean, I I I got to say I don't think that I would vote for anybody to be in our city council that isn't like just not not

1:33:13 only in our city council and our board of commissioners that isn't like making this his platform. The fact that we need services at the library. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Hi there. My name is Carol and I live up off of D Street by Wash by Walnut Park and I moved to Springfield about three years ago. Since I'm five years old, the library has been my safe place. I don't care if I'm living on Maui, San Francisco, Alaska, Portland, or Springfield. It's the single most important institution there is for me. I'm not in need of hospitalization, but I know that's another important one. Um,

1:34:01 I believe that this payroll tax is is a current necessary step to step to fully fund the library. And I'm really curious if you feel safe to defoli cards and do you all use them once a week, once a month? >> Let me know regular. them regularly. Okay, that's good to know. I just want to know that you're dependent on this library because I have a lot of friends that have lots of money for lots of books and I don't. So, I go to Pal's bookstore and I take pictures of and I go to this library and $89 $89,000

1:34:46 cut to their library budget to me is like banning books. It's the same thing. If you can't buy new books, you're banning books. this the um librarians in my mind were guardians of our first amendment right to freedom of speech. And I think that um this important institution is not just realistically symbolically for that exact same reason. So thank you. Hopefully you're going to go for this. >> Thank you. The next two cards I have are Kyra Carroll and Carol and Walker.

1:35:48 >> Hi, my name is Kyra Carroll. I'm a resident of the county with the Eugene address. I don't uh live in Springfield. So, I'm here um as a retired speech and language pathologist. I used to work for OSU and I worked with children who have disabilities, including children with dyslexia. And I think all of you probably know that getting a good foundation for reading is a good predictor of future success. Okay. And um I used to have a Eugene library card and in fact I could have one more cheaply get volunteering there. And I was recently urged to switch from uh volunteering at the at

1:36:35 the Springfield library which I do weekly um to volunteering in Eugene. And of course they have a beautiful library but you have a gem here. I hope you all will do whatever it is needed and I think the payroll tax as I understand it is a good way to provide some funding that will save the gem that you have. And I hope I was really surprised actually to see how many of you have library cards because I know that one of my fellow volunteers has tried to get you individually to talk with you about the library. And if you haven't, he is an amazing person who

1:37:20 knows more about libraries than 99% of the population. But anyway, I really love this library and I would not want to see it lose its excellent reputation and every time I go there, I'm so pleased to see the children pouring in and getting the services they need. So, I I'm really glad that you all have library cards, almost all of you. And I hope you if you don't know much about the services that they do provide now that you will really look into that and thank you for your time because I know you're putting in a lot of effort and I I really appreciate

1:38:06 that each one of you. Thank you. Hi, I'm Caroline and this is Vera Lynn and we live in 97478. Yep. Springfield for three years. And what do we love? >> Abigail. >> Miss Abigail. We love Miss Abigail. We love our library. We love story time. She's right. It's a gem. Not all libraries are like this. Um safe, welcoming, warm things for the kids to play with and engage with. So many available resources, a community. Since we've been here, this has been the place where we have made

1:38:51 our friends, um, found the gems, um, gained sanity. Story time is just as much for moms and caregivers as it is for the kids. Um, and so we just want to show our support and it sounds like the budget conversation is May. Um, so if you know budget cuts are going to affect the library, then we would definitely be in support of fully funding it with the um with the tax. And um I think if we want to think about and solve and find solutions for the greater problems in our community um and the world, it starts here. It starts with all these little kids in the

1:39:36 audience and being here to support this. It starts at places like the library with these resources and helping moms and caregivers and dads and families learn how to be good in this world. So, thank you. You say thank you. >> Thank you. >> And I think you just made Abigail's whole day back there. I see. >> Thank you. The next two people I have are Vonnie Mickelson and Ashir Morer. Hopefully I got that

1:40:27 first. Okay. >> He says I can go first. So that's really kind of uh good evening. Uh, mayor and counselors, um, I'm thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm Vonnie Mickelson. I'm first and foremost a resident of Springfield. I live here. I work here. I'm committed to retiring here soon. And, uh, I also am responsible for running a local nonprofit with a small but mighty team of eight that live on the margins, and slim margins uh, for economic development. And that's the Springfield Chamber of Commerce. We represent 800 members, employers, and employing some 20,000 or more um jobs across the region. And I'd like to share our perspective with you this evening. Because the hearings uh specific to the

1:41:13 payroll tax, I want to be direct about our position. The chambers open to the shared payroll tax at the rate currently proposed at 0.1% for employers and 0.1% for employees. and we support applying those percentages to gross payroll and gross wages. That design choice already moves the revenue outcome above the original task force revenue target of 2.4 million. So, we are amendable to what amounts to an effective increase, but we are not necessarily supportive of unnecessary expansion of the tax rate beyond what is proposed. Now, here's why we're urging you to hold that line. First, Springfield has to pair short-term stabilization with long-term

1:41:58 growth. A payroll tax may help close an immediate gap, but it cannot replace the structural solution of growing Springfield's tax base through business retention, expansion, and development. If the payroll tax rate keeps rising, it begins to work against those growth uh priorities we need for real fiscal sustainability. So, second, even at today's proposed rate, timing and layering matter. Employers are already, as all of you know, absorbing compounded pressures from the corporate activities tax, paid leave, transit payroll, and transportation, gas taxes, regularly cost, and inflation. So, we asked employers this year what the ground truth feels like, and Springfield still scores, congratulations, up to two points higher

1:42:45 for business friendliness than Eugene, Lane County, and the state. And that's on a scale of 1 to 10. So two points is big. That's a hard one advantage. The same survey shows inflation, wage pressure, regulation, taxes dominate the challenge list and growth is cooling compared to previous years even while optimism remains strong. So that combination is exactly why restraint matters. And we do not want the payroll tax to become the default backs stop for every service pressure. Finally, if you advance this proposed rate, guard rails are essential. That means simple administration, 12 months notice before implementation, a three-year rate lock, independent

1:43:30 oversight, transparent public reporting, voter referral for any future base rate increase, and a clear plan for reinvesting any surplus into community and economic vitality priorities. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Uh I am Asher Mir and I represent uh the kids that come to the library every day and like check out books. And for me, the library is a place to explore

1:44:18 your like imagination and your reading abilities and like like a place to explore and a place to have uh fun. And I think that the kids that come here every day, maybe they walk here or they come with parents and stuff, uh they could be like teenagers or like kids who want to like get ahead in class or like just have fun. Cutting the budget for the library just

1:45:03 makes it less valuable of a place to go. And I guess I don't want to see the library that I've been going to just have less people being able to be able to like explore their imagination like doing stuff and like reading books and a a budget cut like cutting like books and like staff and stuff. It'll just make more people like disappointed in when they go to the library and thinking

1:45:49 about how uh the library could be like better and just be disappointed instead of being able to have fun like read books and stuff at the library. >> Before you go, Asher Asher, could you say what part of the city you're from? Do you live in downtown? Do you live in Thirstston? >> Um 1441 11th Street. >> Perfect. Thank you. You did a great job. All right. Um we talked about checking in at 30 minutes. I've got one more card left and then whoever How are we doing on We're doing fine on hands. Just one. >> Okay. Uh the last card I have is Diego Hernandez Sapata.

1:46:38 And if you just gave the card, they come up. You're up. I don't have your card to read your name yet, but come on. Uh, and Melissa, There you go. Uh, I'm Diego Sebastian Sapat. I'd like to represent the uh Hispanic media of Springfield and the um organizations that work with the Springfield Public Library. Uh a major one is one that my uh mother organized called the Eugene Art Latino. Uh pardon, I forgot to mention, I'm also living in Eugene. Um

1:47:23 uh Eugene Latinoia Eren with Antonio. Um these people have formed so many beautiful uh cultural events here with the library for many years. Um to provide just the outlook of uh the culture. Um they provide activities uh workshops, incredible things that uh is it's it's so stunning to see facilitated here in Springfield uh with the library, the assistance of many people that I know that uh are employed here at the library. I would hope that you guys um support the full funding uh for the

1:48:10 mothers that I know. uh these people have supported especially the migrant families that are enduring uh slightly psychological torture or very uh you know it's horrible behavior from the um uh I don't know how to describe it without being too dramatic but obviously uh the administration um the support that I've seen uh from people here from the Springfield public library provided for these migrant families. As I say, uh is something I haven't seen in Eugene. Uh these people have gone out of their way to go to businesses uh to uh speak to people who

1:48:55 normally wouldn't have that information. Uh they go out of their way to provide exact information to defend the businesses and the people who are making those businesses thrive uh their families. There's accommodations uh for nutrition uh support. Uh some of these people are afraid to leave their houses uh because they're being terrorized, racially profiled. Um and they have their guardian angels here at the the library defending them at least in some sort of way. Uh so please support them. um you know their kids. Um also just all

1:49:40 the people of the community that could use reformation through education. Uh not necessarily just kids, but everybody has that um that right to reform and re-educate. Thank you. Hi, my name is Melissa Benzel and I live here in Springfield. Um, and I work here in Springfield. I've had a library card since I was 10 and it was also my safe space. I wasn't um inspired to come up here brave enough until Asher did. So, thank you so much, Asher.

1:50:25 You actually made me cry tonight. Um, I was one of those kids that went to the library to have a safe place and to learn. And I, um, am really proud that I have kept going to school because of the library. Um, I'm really proud to call Springfield my home and raise both my boys coming to this library to every Lego club, the reading clubs, every club. Um, this was our club. I am really proud that um this library helped to um inspire and support my family and me becoming a dental hygienist and helping to support our

1:51:11 community here. And I um I'm here for my boys, for my boys's boys, for my boys's boys' boys, all my community. and I really am um in full support of anything that needs to happen to support our library. Um if this payroll tax is the solution, and I'm a huge proponent of it, um I'm I'm really proud of what we do here in Springfield and I will be really proud to help save this library. Um, thank you so much for listening and being here tonight and I appreciate all

1:51:56 of you. God bless. >> Thank you. That is the last card I have. Neil, could you call any hands that we have raised? >> Yes, there are two hands right now. Kai Fireside followed by Beth Halverson. And Kai, you should be able to unmute your microphone. >> Thanks. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Kaiire said, "I live inside Ward One." Council, the task force didn't seem to give you a ton of good options, which is unfortunate. I understand you don't get to set details of the payroll tax tonight and that you're not deciding on the library directly tonight. But tonight starts the decisions you make that will affect the library funding. I

1:52:41 do have a library card. I returned three physical books to the library dropbox on Sunday and I borrow countless audio books through the library. I hope you direct staff to move forward with implementation of the payroll tax and to find a rate which ensures no library cuts whatsoever. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And the next speaker is Beth Halverson. And Beth, you should be able to unmute your microphone. Thank you. Can you hear me? >> We can. >> Wonderful. Thank you. I am Beth Halverson. I am in W 2. I grew up in Springfield. I graduated in 2003 from Springfield High. I returned to Springfield in 2015 and now I'm working

1:53:27 at Looking Glass at the Springfield Clinic. So, I support so many families to manage um their needs and their resources. And I use the library every week to help them connect in. I don't know if you all understand how big of a mental health resource this library is. I can help a family find a community. If they go to a reading partner, help them find someone else that's maybe struggling with the same thing. I can connect them with a librarian who can help them find the resource. The library is the last free space that we have in our community. And it is such a bastion of um education and connection. I love that I have gone there across my life. I love that I have had visitation with my kids book mom in that library space and

1:54:13 how amazing the librarians were to help us through the good times and the tough times. I love that we've celebrated in the VR space when we finally mastered a level. And most importantly, I love that my kid loves the teen group so much. It is such a big support. I know it that like all of the numbers might not show just how important this space is in our community, but I am such a support of using a payroll tax, increasing it just a nominal amount to make sure that we keep this space a resource, make sure that we keep it a fun, loving place where people of all socioeconomic statuses and all backgrounds can come and find whatever they need. So, I just fully support that and I want to thank

1:54:58 everyone for speaking. Um, you also brought me to tears many times. Thank you. >> No other speakers for this item, mayor. >> Okay. Um, sorry, I meant to excuse you. You You're more than welcome to stay and hang and hang out with us. Thank you. I'm going to close the public hearing. Uh I'm going to make a couple of comments and then I am going to open it up for um the rest of the council before we get to the action which is which is the resolution tonight. First of all, um we've just been in a series of just tough conver community conversations, right? Like I appreciate you folks coming out um and filling the council chambers and sharing where your hearts

1:55:43 are and where your experiences are. Uh they mean a lot to us. uh the fiscal pro the fiscal challenges of the city are like 35 years old. Um so I want to recognize that this community including people in this room including the business community including you know all the volunteers we have worked um towards solving a fiscal cliff that is basically been 35 years in the making and we're almost close to the finish line. It is really hard some of the hardest political work we've all done to try to get the city in a place where it's more fiscally balanced. Now, one of the things I want to re uh just talk through for a second and then I'm going to refer to a comment um that I think the chamber made. Um we have a ton of

1:56:29 needs out there and so in in the context of the next couple of comments, um I just we have a ton of fire needs, we have a ton of building needs, we have a ton of deferred maintenance, we have a ton of road maintenance. Um, so I want in this entire conversation and I know it's really hard because you guys have your own nightly lives to go to, but the library isn't the only need that's out there. And I think my concern remains that if we start opening up the overall rate, then we're going to try to address all our potential needs out there and make this unsustainable. Now with that be like with that being said and I think this is the important thing where we're hearing where we're hearing you. The chamber made a reference to a change

1:57:16 that we made in the in the methodology and I know it sounds really technical but really what it means is that there's more money there than what we expected. All right. So there's probably anywhere between I don't know may maybe Nate you can keep me honest here. probably between $3 to $500,000 more becau in this current rate because of how we changed the methodology. So you're going to if you're thinking to yourself, well, how does that impact the library? really what I want would would recommend or what I'm supportive of is giving our finance staff a chance to reforcast the budget and provide the council with an up like with an updated range based on

1:58:02 the rate and the changes that we made knowing that we've effectively created more money there um even though the rate hasn't changed. So everybody's come into this room room sort of saying hey could you change it another h 100th and I think my recommendation is like let's get to the next conversation ask finance to reforcast given the amount given the change in the change in the rate long-term like I favor getting this complete in the in in the budget committee um that gives us a chance to weigh it as a community but also um the current payroll tax as it's written like the library like those dollars can be used for the library. Those dollars can be used for police, fire, everything that we used here. So, that's that that's good. I know if I was sitting in your chair, I would want to have this kind of

1:58:48 resolved tonight so that you could, you know, go and enjoy your uh en enjoy Christmas and the holidays. Um, but I think my my my opinion is let us get updated numbers, right? let us take this feedback and forward it to the city manager and consider that you know as we put together next budget is to take all this community community feedback and evaluate it at that point. And then lastly uh I know folks are try ready to jump in. I think the thing I keep thinking about a long drive to Portland today was um that where do we want to be as a as a community in 2037, right? And I think this entire conversation has been working to this question about library services and how like where do

1:59:35 where does this community want to be? How do we potential how do we potentially get there? And I think where my head is is is really kind of turning that corner and going, okay, what do we need from library services? What do we need from groups like you? And then what is potentially that gap and how do we how do we solve how do we solve that as a community? So really just to repeat myself is I think there's pro there's more money there. It's valuable to to give us time to forecast and have the next conversation and do some technical work and understand the state of our new finances based on changes that we that we've already made as we've worked this process. your feedback. I would recom I think we forward it to the city manager so that we that as the budget gets put together

2:00:20 for this next year, we consider all of that feedback and then ask her to propose obviously a balanced budget for what our needs are. Also, the 42nd Street comment, in case you were wondering, 42nd Street is the boundary between two wards. So, if we all looked at each other like uh where where that word was. Yeah, it's literally the the boundary. It depends on what side you're on. Okay, councelor Rodley. >> Thank you. And I'll just take just a minute because I think you did a really good job of laying out what the next steps are. Just want to thank everyone for coming out and continuing to come out and sending letters and asking for meetings and all of the things. Um it is very important to I will just speak for myself um to understand and to feel in

2:01:07 solidarity with my neighbors and understand that we're all building the community that we want while we're tackling these problems. So I want to thank you for coming out. I know you don't get a lot back from us because of just the way this is set up, but thank you. Please stay engaged. Let's take this through into the spring. Thank you. Council Blackwell. >> Yes. It's not always easy being on this side of the DAS, right? There's there's big financial questions that we're grappling with and trying to solve. And and I just want to say I really appreciate anytime that the community members show up and speak to us and give you know your experience and your thoughts because um anytime we can hear your voice whether it's an email that we

2:01:53 get or in person it it really does you know help us shape and form the next steps in our heads. So I appreciate you all being here. >> Councelor Mo, >> the mayor expressed very clearly our future is limited. We only had x number of dollars in the city to spend this year. We used to have a surplus. We're out of that surplus. We have to run on exactly what comes in now. So, city services have to be paid by that. What are we going to cut? Well, you know, libraries very important. There's other services too that are going to be affected by this this limit income and that's coming down the line. And so, libraries one does everything else. fire

2:02:38 uh may other services are going to be affected by the budget. So be aware. >> Council Weber, uh the mayor did lay out a lot of the struggles that we're facing as we work through this very challenging conversation. Um it isn't easy to sit up here and know that we potentially are disappointing members of our community. Uh the realities are we have a a general fund being used by the library in excess of $2 million with uh very little revenue coming in. And I'm going to say not only do I have a library card, which I would be very happy to pay for if it would help solve this issue, um I served as the treasurer

2:03:25 for the foundation board for two or three years. And this conversation isn't new. It's been following us for a really really long time and that's part of the problem. It's it's built up on us to this point where we have some really difficult decisions to make and I'm going to again say I don't want to disappoint anybody in this community. I value the library. I understand the importance of it. Um, and I hope that you will continue to work through this with us and um, understand that the business community does have a right to have their voices heard in this conversation as well. Um, employees are going to be tapped to pay whatever it is that we ask of them. And we're not the only ones asking for

2:04:11 additional uh, payroll taxes, additional taxes of any kind from our community members. And those all add up. And it's just I just want to say I I love the library, too. And I just I hope we can find a solution that everybody can leave feeling at least somewhat good about. And we have a lot of time still to talk about this. So, so keep sharing, keep coming. The conversation's not done yet. Just just know that. Thank you, >> Councelor Stone. I really appreciate everybody coming out. Uh thank you very much for your comments. Um just a a comment from uh community member and library volunteer that spoke to me. Uh Jim Lener is one of my heroes in this community. He used to

2:04:56 be the mayor of Kirkland, Washington and stood up for a tremendous number of citizen interests above corporate interests. And he said to me something that always stuck with me which is that the or since our conversation was that the library is like an adolescent child. We have to be careful with it. we have to nurture it because you have something here that is so precious that needs to emerge into something that is is just about ready. And so the last thing I think any of us want to do is to cut off that beautiful growth and the beautiful things that librarians and community members are doing on behalf of our community. So, uh you you have my sincere respect and support as much as we can possibly give um giving some extremely frustrating constraints that we all face every day and I believe the

2:05:42 mayor put those out um quite eloquently. So, thank you councelor Buck. I I think that um a lot of my colleagues have done excuse me a better job of uh talking about you know some of the some of the challenges we face as counselors and then as many of you know I'm new to new to the council um but also uh I really appreciate how many of you have come come out to talk with us about your experiences your values um because one of the things that Springfield has done a very good job of is cultivating community conversation. Um, you know, as I've said before, my kids value the

2:06:27 library. Um, my kids get what they need at the library when they when they're not getting it at somewhere else. You know, my my kids don't ask to go to a bookstore, they got asked to go to the library. Um, you know, it's my son doesn't necessarily love to read, but he loves all the other programs. And maybe if we go see some cool stuff at the library, maybe we can find a cool book possibly. No guarantees there. Um my my daughter would just live at the library. And I think that it's important to know that we all take this seriously and we all do value uh what we have in the library. And more importantly, we value you guys showing up and talking to us because as it was commented here, um we

2:07:12 do represent uh the community to the best of our ability. Um but that what aids our ability is hearing from you guys. So the emails that we get, the letters that we get, you guys coming and talking with us, that's vital to us being able to do our job and and do the best for you guys in Springfield. Um, so I appreciate you guys coming out and I appreciate um all the people that spoke tonight. Please continue to do that on every issue. The more we talk, the better solutions and outcomes we can have. >> All right, I think we're ready for a motion.

2:07:59 Got it. I move to adopt a resolution directing staff to develop a payroll tax for council review and deliberation. >> Second, >> yes. Councelor Weber, >> yes. >> Councelor Mo, >> yes. >> Councelor Rodley, >> councelor Blackwell, >> yes. >> Councelor Buck, >> yes. >> Oh, Councelor Stout, >> yes. Thank you. >> Motion passes. Six yeses, zero nos. This is our only item for this meeting. Um, we we are adjourned. Uh, feel free. We've got seated next. Um, but we are going to have to reconfigure the room a little bit and bring one more board member up. So, it'll be just a couple more minutes before we start.