As Springfield mayor reflects on 2025 and looks ahead, economic development is key issue

Springfield Mayor Sean VanGordon sat down with Lookout Eugene-Springfield to talk about the city’s progress in 2025, some of the year’s biggest topics and what he’s looking forward to next year.

VanGordon, 45, has been mayor of Springfield since 2021. His current term goes through 2028. But last month, he announced he was entering the race for Lane County commissioner against incumbent David Loveall. Should VanGordon win, he would leave his role as mayor before January 2027. 

The following has been edited for clarity and length.

Lookout Eugene-Springfield: What are you most proud of as mayor from this past year?

VanGordon: I think I’m most proud of the progress the city has made on long-term challenges. So when we think about the 42nd Street Levee, the work continues to go along. We’ve got the Corps of Engineers down here right now looking about what we need to do. We finished Mill Street, which was a commitment we made to the community. And then we had a pretty in-depth conversation about budgets that was timely and important, and I thought was very productive.

So the thing I’m the most proud of is the ability for this community to shift and have conversations about its long-term needs and desires and goals and do it in a healthy and productive way that allows us to continue to make progress.

What is the biggest lesson you learned as mayor in 2025?

I think every year teaches you something about whatever elected office that you’re in. In 2025 it was the importance of really slowing down. And given the complexity of topics that we had, taking the time to tell the story of the elected leaders in Team Springfield, so people understand that while any challenge we face may not get fixed today, we have a plan. We have our arms around it. We’re going to make progress in an appropriate, methodical and thoughtful way that is representative of where this community is. 

The other thing I’ve noticed in 2025 was, we’re a community that’s growing and constantly changing, and it reminded me that we still have a lot of new people here. Somebody may have only lived here two years, somebody may have lived here all their entire life, but as an elected leader, it’s my commitment to look my constituents in the eye, talk to them really openly about any challenge that we have, and take their feedback and include it in the process.

What do you want to accomplish as mayor in 2026? 

We’re going to see things that we’ve talked about for a little while begin to come to fruition. An example of that would be the street levy [Bond funds are being used for six street repair projects.] The voters passed that in 2024 but we designed all through 2025. We should see the first couple of those in 2026 where the public can see it on the street.

I think there’s an opening to have a conversation about economic development and economic growth that I’m really excited about. It’s a place that Springfield shows up very well and how we support our businesses in a challenging economic environment to continue to grow and add jobs.

And then I’m really looking forward to some of the private investment wrapping up. Rosboro is making great strides on that mill, which is an important step in our manufacturing basis. So there’s a lot of things to look forward to in 2026.

What’s the first issue you want to tackle as mayor in 2026?

I think there’s going to be two issues that right out the gate are going to come at us at the same time. The payroll tax, because we’ve got to make decisions around the scope and size and actually take all the conversations we’ve had the last year and actually begin effectively legislating. That is going to happen. And the fire governance conversation is going to be here in January, and they’re going to look to us for feedback and direction, which has been a big topic.

What do you think is the most pressing issue for Springfield in the coming year?

I think it’s economic development. Some of the issues that we face around housing and our budgets are sort of peripheral. The budget issue is really important. The fire issue is really important. But the difference with economic development is, if we have this in a responsible way, where we’re continuing to set ourselves up for success in the future years, and be open to growth and pro-growth, it makes everything else easier. If our wages as a city were growing 5% instead of 2% or our businesses were growing at 7% or 10%, that really makes the headwinds that we face as a city astronomically easier. Everything is easier when the economy is just growing a little bit more.

What economic development strategies do you think Springfield should pursue?

We have to sort of stay the course with Glenwood. We’ve made a lot of progress. We’re further along than we’ve ever been, but it is a complicated conversation, and we need to continue. 

Downtown, we’ve got several buildings that are getting very, very close to either pulling permits or getting ready to redevelop. And we need to really get our arms around this conversation about Gateway, because we have commercial and developable land that is up there, but it’s going to take infrastructure and planning and traffic and all the things to really open those lands up for long-term development. 

Other things I would love to see: I think I’ve been, historically, a fan of closing the Glenwood transfer site. That is land that could be redeveloped. There’s people interested in buying that land today that could bring new businesses to the area.

And I want to see this conversation with the universities really play out from a legislative perspective. I would love to position Springfield in a place where they could support a university ask around R&D tax credits. They’ve got a lot of new businesses over there that are doing a lot of great research. If U of O continues to develop and research in this way, I really want to build it in the city of Springfield.

And lastly I would just end the point that every business group I ever talked to I just asked them, “What help do you need to grow 10% next year?” And 10% is a made-up number, but if they are more forward focused and more growth friendly, that helps everybody.

What do you think of the police department’s decision to remove the Flock cameras installed in Springfield?

I’m supportive. I was proud of how the police department joined that conversation and was curious about where people were at and really took the time to listen and understand where the problems were. I’ve had several meetings with them where they have looked and asked follow-up questions to try to nail down, “What are we actually hearing?” 

The Flock camera conversation started in a way where they were looking for something around retail theft. This is a pro-public safety town. It’s a pro-economic development town. They were looking for tools to help them get their arms around retail theft and generally be more effective. And then by the time they sort of got here, there were other broader concerns people brought up, and I thought they’ve shown up in a way that has been really effective, really empathetic, really understanding, to try to make sure that we’re hearing and understanding what people are telling us so that we can respond appropriately in the future. I think they made the right call.

The most important thing out of the conversation is that the groups keep talking together. Because if we could get to a point that everybody’s got some understanding how to evaluate technologies in the future that would put the community on a really good footing, to make sure everybody understands what we’re trying to do and why and how, and have some of these conversations around, “What do we do with data security? What do we do around privacy concerns?”

Do you think the police department should continue to pursue automated license-plate reader cameras?

I’m open to them making the case of how to use new technologies in the future, and how to talk to the community in a way that makes sense. The police should always bring up different ideas or different technologies or different investments that can make their job more effective, have us be more effective with the taxpayers’ dollars and keep the community safe. And when the PD talks to this community, people trust the Springfield Police Department. So I think there’s room to have that conversation.

How do you plan to respond to requests from community members to act against ICE activity in Springfield?

We are responsible to follow all the laws, state laws, federal laws, local laws. It is an extremely difficult situation that people are under. You know people, as they request things, and I will continue to take meetings with folks that want to talk about it. I really just need to understand what their asks are. Some of their asks are probably not legal under our system of government. Some of those asks may be very doable. I think, as a community, we remain open, and I want to make sure that we’re a welcoming community, and I want people to feel safe here. But some of the asks that we’ve seen up until this point, they don’t appear to be legal.

Some Oregon cities have declared a state of emergency over federal immigration activity. Do you think Springfield should do this?

I think I’m still working my way through the legal advice for it. So what they’ve sent me is effectively links to all the different cities that have done that. I’m reading through them. The question I have is, what does that actually get folks? At this point, I don’t think we should do this.

But when people, especially in charged moments when this is really heavy on part of the community, I don’t want to jump to conclusions. Traditionally, for cities, states of emergency are designed to spend more money from a budgetary perspective or do something else that is like responding necessarily to a flood. 

Where I’m thinking about how to understand it is, if somebody did that, what does that actually help? But, like I said, my opinion is, having read about half the material so far, I still have to read the other half of the material. So I guess my short answer is, come ask me in another month when I get through all the material.