Here are the minutes of  a plan to have Apex of Dubai build a futuristic city in Glenwood. I talked to a homeowner who put a monkey-wrench in the works. Chambers Construction was going to do the work. Apex is just a shell of it original self. They are one of the suspects in crashing my last blog. Trump has/had plans to build a huge golf course resort in Dubai. How does this tie in with the murder of Kashoggi?

Above is a pic of me wearing a Communist Russian flag taken two years ago by the river. I am shouting out a warning – of bad things to come! How easy it was/is to dismiss the Mad Augur Man. But, now that Donald’s Super Hotel Deal with Russian, may get him impeached, and his sons LOCKED UP, folks will start listening to me. It looks bad that they tear down Armstrong’s KORE after considering erecting a monument to Arab Oil Sheiks. Our Mayor has been leery of me for ten years.

John Presco

https://rosamondpress.com/2014/04/17/belushis-animal-house-car/

https://rosamondpress.com/2014/04/17/belushis-animal-house-car/

Director Christine Lundberg said she believed it was important for the Glenwood Riverfront Development project to remain identified with Springfield.  She said she was eager for citizen participation.  Mr. Larson said the location of the project was unique and could serve as a connector between Springfield and Eugene.  He said it also needed a sense of “enclosure of location.”

M I N U T E S
Springfield Economic Development Agency October 9, 2006 – 6:15 P.M. Springfield City Hall – Jessie Maine Meeting Room 225 Fifth Street – Springfield

MEMBERS PRESENT: Tammy Fitch, Chair; Anne Ballew, Bill Dwyer, Sid Leiken, Christine Lundberg, Joe Pishioneri, Dave Ralston, Faye Stewart, and John Woodrow. MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: John Tamulonis, Gino Grimaldi, Kevin Ko, Joe Leahy

I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Tammy Fitch called the meeting of the Springfield Economic Development Agency (SEDA) to order at 6:10 p.m. Minutes Recorder Daniel Lindstrom called the roll stumblingly and stated that a quorum was present.

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Director Dave Ralston moved, seconded by Director Joe Pishioneri, to accept the minutes of the September 25, 2006, meeting. The motion was adopted unanimously, 7:0, Director Christine Lundberg having not yet joined the meeting.

III. COMMUNICATIONS A. Business from the Audience None.

B. Correspondence Community Development Manager John Tamulonis reported that several telephone calls and letters regarding the Glenwood Riverfront Development had been received. He said they had especially encouraged the inclusion of bicycle/pedestrian pathways in any plan that was adopted.

C. Business from Staff Mr. Tamulonis reported that the next SEDA meeting would include consideration of an offer for the purchase of property in an Executive Session. Mr. Tamulonis suggested that the rumored departure of the Chairperson as a SEDA member would necessitate choosing new officers. He proposed that an election be held in January 2007.

Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes October 9, 2006 Page 2

IV. REPORT OF THE CHAIR Chairperson Fitch expressed appreciation to the members of the presentations Evaluation Committee and Planning, Public Works, and Finance staff for their commitment to the tasks of preparing a recommendation regarding a Glenwood Riverfront Master Developer.

V. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES None.

VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Recommendation for Glenwood Riverfront Master Developer Mr. Tamulonis distributed copies of material distributed by representatives of the Glenwood Riverfront Company and APEX Investment Group and copies of questions asked by the Evaluation Committee at its October 2, 2006 all-day session. He said copies of video presentations made by the groups were available on request. Mr. Tamulonis distributed copies of an October 9 memorandum with a staff recommendation for Glenwood Riverfront Master Developer. He said it was based on evaluations of presentations made at the October 2 meeting and evaluations of both proposals prepared by City Planning and Public Works staff. He said evaluations of the proposals and their presenters by independent financial advisors were not yet completed, but would be available if SEDA approved continuing discussions with one of the Master Developers. Director Christine Lundberg joined the meeting at 6:25 p.m. Mr. Tamulonis reviewed Planning and Public Works issues related to the proposals included in his memorandum. He summarized Evaluation Committee rankings and comments also included. He highlighted additional comments about each proposal included. Mr. Tamulonis stated that SEDA staff recommended that the Board continue discussions with APEX Investment Group and receive a full presentation of its proposal at an extended November 6 meeting. He reviewed reasons contributing to the recommendation included in his memorandum. Director Sid Leiken requested that a member of the Evaluation Committee comment on the presentations and staff recommendation. David Carvo stated that he was impressed with the emphasis in the APEX presentation that access to the river would be valuable in the development and that the location was ideal for its use. He said he believed the APEX proposal met all the requirements set by SEDA, but that the Glenwood Riverfront Company proposal became bogged down in problems to be faced. He suggested that the APEX proposal showed the most “concern for people” and said it was positive that a former Glenwood resident was on its presentation team. He said he was impressed with the well-rounded and professional/educational skills of the APEX project managers and with their knowledge of local land use requirements and opportunities. Director Stewart said he believed both proposals had been well prepared and would likely be successful. He said the Glenwood Riverfront Company proposal seemed most interested in “horizontal” (land) development, whereas the APEX proposal appeared to have an ability and preference for doing horizontal and “vertical” (buildings) development. He said he appreciated the APEX emphasis on its vision for the Riverfront property, versus the Glenwood reliance on market preferences to determine a development strategy. He said he was concerned that the Glenwood proposal considered control of Franklin Boulevard an impediment to development that would require intervention by the City, whereas APEX as
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes October 9, 2006 Page 3

sumed it would participate, or even take the lead, in resolution of problems related to it that affected project access. He said he was surprised at the awareness of local conditions presented by APEX. He said APEX appeared to have greater financial resources available for the project. Director Leiken asked if assurances of the financial condition of APEX were available. Mr. Tamulonis said a full report of the financial statuses of the proposal presenters could be available if SEDA chose to accept the staff recommendation. Director Ralston asked if all members of the Evaluation Committee agreed with the recommendation to continue discussions with APEX. Mr. Tamulonis said his recommendation was based on the evaluations of Planning staff, Public Works staff, and Evaluation Committee. He reviewed criteria percentage scores compiled for each proposal submitted by members of the Committee included in his memorandum. Director Pishioneri asked if the experience of APEX in the development of other projects had been investigated. Mr. Tamulonis reported that a report on such issues would be included in the report to be received from the independent financial advisors. Director Leiken asked if SEDA members were allowed to contact representatives of the Portland Development Corporation about its experience with APEX. SEDA Attorney Joe Leahy stated that since no decision regarding a contract with APEX would be made at the current meeting, such contact was permitted. Chairperson Fitch said she believed it was appropriate to continue discussions with APEX regarding its Glenwood Riverfront development proposal. Director Ralston said he was disappointed that the presentation from the Glenwood Riverfront Company had not fared better in the evaluation process. He said he would have preferred to deal with a locally owned company in the development project. Mr. Tamulonis said video tape recordings of the presentations and Evaluation Committee discussions had been made and were available to SEDA members. Director Anne Ballew said she believed the Evaluation Committee and staff had correctly recommended that discussions continue with APEX, but that the financial evaluation of its experience would be crucial in a decision to choose it as Master Developer for the project. Director Ballew moved, seconded by Director Pishioneri, to continue discussions with APEX Investment Group and have a presentation of its development proposal and a report from the independent financial advisors made at a SEDA meeting on November 6, 2006. The motion was adopted unanimously, 8:0. Mr. Tamulonis expressed appreciation for the service of the members of the Evaluation Committee and other staff reviewers. Director Ralston said he believed it would be important to ensure in a relationship with APEX for Springfield interests to remain in control and influence.

V. NEW BUSINESS A. Part-time Staff Position Mr. Tamulonis referred to an Agenda Item Summary entitled “Proposed Part-Time, Limited Duration Staff Position” and reviewed information it contained regarding the recruitment of a half-time Planner to serve as SEDA staff. He said establishing a relationship with APEX as Master Developer would quickly “ramp up” the need for such a position. He recommended that a request to assist with recruitment of a person to fill the position be initiated with the City of Springfield in a timely manner to allow hiring of a person to be considered at a November SEDA meeting.
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes October 9, 2006 Page 4

Chairperson Fitch said she believed a suggestion previously made by Director Bill Dwyer should be included that the responsibilities of the position should include supervision of potential University of Oregon interns. Director John Woodrow moved, seconded by Director Pishioneri, to request that the City of Springfield recruit a person to serve as a half-time Planner 1, limited-duration SEDA employee. Director Ballew said she was concerned about the financial impact of hiring someone for such a position. She said she was also concerned that the Planner 1 skill set would not be adequate for the responsibilities of the position. Mr. Tamulonis replied that consideration had also been given to establishing Management Analyst or Secretary/Clerk qualifications for the position, but that the need to work with both the Master Developer and with citizens suggested that setting the qualifications “somewhere in the middle” would be most beneficial. Director Ballew asked if current SEDA revenue was adequate to cover the cost of the proposed position and other staff and operating obligations. Mr. Tamulonis replied that it was possible that adding the position would strain available resources, but that it was possible that the position would be of short duration. Director Ballew asked if the City Human Resources Department had been contacted regarding the position. Mr. Tamulonis replied that its representatives had agreed that the job description attached to the Agenda Item Summary was appropriate. Director Leiken asked if funding the position could be included in a Development Agreement established with a Master Developer. Mr. Tamulonis said the City had experience in creating such an arrangement and that the possibility would be explored. The motion to request City assistance in recruiting a SEDA employee was adopted, 7:1, with Director Ballew voting no.

B. Glenwood Residential Improvement Program Housing Division lead staff Kevin Ko referred to an Agenda Item Summary entitled “Glenwood Residential Improvement Program” and reviewed its description of a proposal for a housing rehabilitation loan program for Glenwood residents. He explained that its goals would be to maintain current housing stock and provide a way for low-income homeowners to make improvements to their primary residences. Director Ralston said he supported the program idea, but that he did not believe there were Springfield resources available to fund it. Chairperson Fitch replied that SEDA funds would be used to support the program. Director Woodrow asked if homes using septic tank waste disposal systems would be eligible to participate in the proposed program. Mr. Ko replied that, with certain limitations, it would be possible. He explained that, in one instance, the parallel City program had used the available loan to facilitate annexation and attachment to the sewer system. Director Pishioneri asked for an explanation of improvements allowed to be paid for by the proposed loan program. Mr. Ko stated that almost any improvement, except expansion, would be eligible, if it made a home more comfortable, efficient, or enabled it to meet building code requirements. Director Lundberg asked what eligibility standards would be used for the proposed program. Mr. Ko replied that the standards would be set by SEDA. Mr. Tamulonis suggested that U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) standards for such loans might be adopted for the Glenwood area.
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes October 9, 2006 Page 5

Director Leiken stated that he supported the proposed program and favored using HUD eligibility standards. He suggested that the entire program be exactly parallel to the similar program operated by the City. He said it was important for investment to be made in the housing stock of Glenwood. Director Pishioneri said he agreed with Director Leiken and suggested that the program include facilitation for annexation of properties to the City. Director Ballew asked if the deferred payment loans would continue to be obligated to SEDA if a property was annexed. Mr. Ko replied that it would. Mr. Leahy added that if SEDA were dissolved, arrangements would be made for its outstanding loans to be transferred to the City. He added that there were certain minor legal alterations he would suggest regarding the proposal. Director Woodrow moved, seconded by Director Lundberg, to approve the proposal for a Glenwood Residential Improvement Program, amended by suggestions of the City Attorney. Chairperson Fitch determined that there was agreement to not vote on the motion, but wait until a final version of the proposal was available.

VI. PUBLIC HEARING None.

Chairperson Fitch announced that the next SEDA meeting would be held November 6 in the Library Meeting Room, allowing the participation of citizens and especially Glenwood residents.

The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.

(Recorded by Daniel Lindstrom)

_____________________________ Christine Lundberg Secretary

M I N U T E S
Springfield Economic Development Agency November 6, 2006 – 7:00 P.M. Springfield City Hall – Library Meeting Room 225 Fifth Street – Springfield

MEMBERS PRESENT: Tammy Fitch, Chair; Anne Ballew, Sid Leiken, Christine Lundberg, Dave Ralston, and Faye Stewart. MEMBERS ABSENT: Bill Dwyer, Joe Pishioneri, and John Woodrow. STAFF PRESENT: John Tamulonis, Gino Grimaldi. APEX REPRESENTATIVES: Charlie Brucker, John Flynn, Daniel Ingrim, Gary Larson, and David Sierens.

I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Tammy Fitch called the meeting of the Springfield Economic Development Agency (SEDA) to order at 8:10 p.m. Minutes Recorder Daniel Lindstrom called the roll and stated that a quorum was present.

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Director Dave Ralston moved, seconded by Director Anne Ballew, to accept the minutes of the October 9, 2006, meeting. The motion was adopted unanimously, 6:0.

III. COMMUNICATIONS A. Business from the Audience None.

B. Correspondence None.

C. Business from Staff Mr. Tamulonis reported that, following authorization given at the October meeting, a search had begun for half-time Planner to serve as SEDA staff. He said six applications had been received and that a recommendation for hiring would be presented at the December meeting.

IV. REPORT OF THE CHAIR None.

Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes November 6, 2006 Page 2

V. OLD BUSINESS A. Presentation by Preferred Glenwood Riverfront Master Developer Chairperson Fitch expressed appreciation for the presentation of the Apex Investment Group proposal for the Glenwood Riverfront Redevelopment. David Sierens introduced members of the panel making the presentation: Daniel Ingrim – Chief Development Officer, Apex/Willamette Investment Group David Sierens – Vice President, Business Development and Marketing, Apex Gary Larson – Principal, MulvannyG2 Architecture John Flynn – MulvannyG2 Charlie Brucker – Walker-Macy Landscape Architects Mr. Sierens explained that Chris Zahas of the Leland Consulting Group, Real Estate Strategists, a significant participant in the proposed project, was unable to be present. Mr. Sierens described Apex Investment Group as a privately held firm with thirty years of real estate, design, engineering, and construction experience. He said its headquarters was in Portland, had offices in other cities, and was involved in major development projects in the Middle East. Mr. Sierens reported that on learning of the Glenwood Riverfront Project, Apex had concluded it was perfect for mixed-use development. He said what was created would take advantage of the scenic and beautiful site and be specific to the unique community in which it was located. He said the development would be formed by a yet-to-bedeveloped marketing strategy. Gary Larson stated that MulvannyG2 Architecture had extensive experience working with government and private property owners in the development of urban environments that involve local jurisdictions and surrounding neighborhoods. Charlie Brucker stated that Walker-Macy had extensive experience with waterfront development. He said recent projects in Portland and Corvallis illustrated the commitment of the firm to enhancing the river and human interaction with it. Mr. Larson stated that Leland Consulting had extensive experience developing partnership with many cities in the West and Mountain regions of the U.S. He said it was a firm of strategic advisors serving public and private leadership in the development and redevelopment of urban places. Mr. Larson described MulvannyG2 and his continued excitement in working to create community. He displayed photos of the Glenwood area and of the site to be developed. He suggested it would be important to consider the synergism of the entire area and how its location would contribute to the uniqueness of the project. Mr. Larson reviewed Urban Design Goals of the Riverfront Redevelopment Project: – Connectivity between the district and the river – Maximize open space – Establish an active, vibrant, and walk-able pedestrian environment – Create a rectangular street pattern – Create an authentic sense of place – Create a neighborhood environment accessible to all Mr. Larson referred to maps he said illustrated how Franklin Boulevard was used to enable development of areas south of the project site. He described how mixed-use
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes November 6, 2006 Page 3

development for living, working and playing created community. He said the project would include 1,300 residential units and thousands of square feet of office/retail space. He projected a “fly-through” of the architectural design potential showing building types, and residential/commercial/open-space concepts. Mr. Brucker described his familiarity with the project site from his experience at the University of Oregon, marriage of a resident, and on-going family visits and recreation there. He said it would be the intention of Walker-Macy to contribute to the Riverfront development by creating landscaping which would encourage the co-existence of people and the river. He described street designs, gardens, open spaces, and the use of art that would bring people to the water. Mr. Larson described principles of public-private partnership used by the Leland Consulting Group: – Building trust between parties – Taking the “long view” – Working “in the middle” between public and private entities – Protecting the project – Developing a shared vision in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) – Including detailed points in a Development & Disposition Agreement (DDA) Mr. Larson reviewed development principles, branding and identity, using a market strategy versus a market study, and redevelopment strategies to be used in the project. He said redevelopment of Glenwood would be unique, a special opportunity, and take hard work. He said Apex and MulvannyG2 were ready to undertake and stick to the task. Director Sid Leiken stated he was impressed with the dream for development of Springfield in the Apex proposal. He said he was pleased that the project took advantage of the most valuable Glenwood asset, its natural resources. He said he believed patience in preparing for the development was paying off and that he was looking forward to its next steps. He said the presentation had been very helpful. Director Ballew expressed appreciation for the presentation. She asked if it was possible to estimate a timeframe for beginning and completion of the project. Mr. Larson replied that preparing such an estimate would hinge on the public/private partnership established, especially related to development of needed infrastructure. He said time would also be needed to develop more fully the concept with community input. He said Apex was ready to begin as soon as possible. Director Christine Lundberg said she believed it was important for the Glenwood Riverfront Development project to remain identified with Springfield. She said she was eager for citizen participation. Mr. Larson said the location of the project was unique and could serve as a connector between Springfield and Eugene. He said it also needed a sense of “enclosure of location.” Chairperson Fitch said she was pleased that fulfilling the dream of Glenwood redevelopment had started before the end of her tenure as a member of SEDA. Director Leiken suggested that there would be value in having a presentation of the Apex Glenwood Riverfront Redevelopment proposal made before appropriate representatives of the University of Oregon. Director Faye Stewart said he had found the Apex presentation to be exciting.
Springfield Economic Development Agency Minutes November 6, 2006 Page 4

Mark Gardiner stated that he had participated in the Presentations and Evaluation Committee as a financial consultant. He said his study of documents submitted regarding the Financial Capability of Apex had convinced him that the company had the financial wherewithal to undertake the proposed project. He said that its business experience gave confidence that it would carry out its strategy. He said SEDA should give a very high priority to development of a MOU. Chairperson Fitch determined that members were ready to act on a recommendation to move forward. Director Leiken moved, seconded by Director Stewart, to authorize staff to begin negotiations with Apex/Willamette Investment Group for its designation as the Glenwood Riverfront Master Developer. The motion was adopted unanimously, 6:0.

The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.

(Recorded by Daniel Lindstrom)

_____________________________ Christine Lundberg Secretary