Jerry Spegmen retired in 2018 following a forty-year career in public interest law and public health policy advocacy, and was recently appointed to the Manzanita City Council. He agreed to answer TAC questions regarding the progress of the Cherry Trail and help provide some clarity to the City's posture on the trail development.
Q: Are you able to share more information from the review of Rohter's attorney letter - perhaps a redacted copy? The Council has suggested there was nothing in the letter to nix the Cherry Trail. Has anything changed in this regard?
A: I am not able to share the letter from our city attorney at this time. I do not believe that the council as whole has suggested that "there was nothing in the letter to nix the Cherry Trail.'' I do agree that individual members of the council had different levels of concern after reading the letter.
Q: What is the main issue preventing approval of the Cherry Trail from the Mayor's and Councils standpoint?
A: Speaking only for myself, I think from discussions I have been a part of on council and listened to prior to joining council that the primary concerns relate to environmental impacts, city liability, and future maintenance costs.
Q: Can you please share more about the decision to not have a public meeting regarding the closure of the right of way?
A: The city council accepted the city manager's recommendation to post no trespassing signs at a public meeting of the council on 1/14/21. This was a special meeting of the council, called to consider one item of new business and two items of old business, including the Cherry Street trail. The trail was included on this agenda to address concerns raised at the regular council meeting on 1/6/21 by Brian Rohter. Minutes from the special meeting reflect the council's intent to further consider the Cherry Street trail as part of the trail master planning process.
Q: Is the closure of the Cherry right of way legal? If so why is it in contradiction with the Manzanita Comprehensive plan?
A: Yes. I would defer to the city attorney regarding your question about the comprehensive plan, although it would be surprising to me if that document definitively dictated the city's actions in this particular matter.
Q: Can you share more about the rationale behind having a Master Trail Plan prior to addressing the Cherry Trail?
A: The trail master plan is being developed by the city to maximize the effective use of limited city resources for trail development and maintenance. I was not on city council when the former city manager contracted with Chris Bernhardt to help us develop the master plan, but as a new councilor this seems to me to be a very logical and efficient use of public dollars that will ultimately support future investments. We are currently on track to consider including funding in the 2021-22 FY budget to begin implementing some components of a trail master plan. The plan will include a process for how citizens can advocate for implementation of specific components. Speaking only as one member of the current council, it makes sense to me that the framework of the trail master plan will guide the consideration of any trail-related funding in next FY's budget.
Q: What is the status of the published Trail Timeline with Budget which totals $88,000?
A: The timeline has not been adopted by council, and I do not know if any formal action will be taken on it prior to adoption of the FY 2021-22 budget (although it would surprise me if funding for any trail development anywhere in the city was not considered in the context of the trail master plan).
Q: Has the City held discussions with Luanne Soderstrom regarding her driveway located in the public right of way?
A: I don't know.
Q: Has the City held discussions with the owners of the 1.38 acre Sand Dune?
Are they willing to consider allowing public access adjacent to the City's right of way to allow more gentle sloping of the trail?
Are they open to allowing other public access on other parts of their property?
Does the Council support a resolution adopting Oregon's trail immunity laws as a City below 500,000? What would it take for this to be accomplished? What could delay this process?
A: I previously shared with TAC members information provided to me by the city building official regarding his conversation with the owner of the property in question. I am not aware of any other relevant discussions with the owner.
Q: Has the City decided that they need to own and fund the Cherry Trail project?
A: No.
Q: What are the City’s preferences around construction of the trail (for instance: volunteers led by TKO versus city employees)?
A: I don't believe any preferences in this regard have been fully considered at this point.
Q: What type of engineering report will the City need to see before finalizing approval? Does the proposed scope from Morgan Civil Engineering discussed with Cynthia Amarillo work?
A: I don't know.
Q: The timeline suggested an environmental report. Can you explain what an environmental report is, what its goals are, and what possible outcomes would be of such a report?
A: The timeline has not been adopted by council so I won't comment on specific elements of it.
Final words from Jerry: I continue to believe, as I've shared with you in the past, that the development of a trail master plan will ultimately facilitate consideration of individual trail projects such as the Cherry Street options that have been identified. I look forward to the further input of TAC members in the master planning process.
Comments