City Council - Regular Meeting

Will the recorder please call the roll?

I am here.

Mayor Prigg?

Here.

Councillor Hassan?

Here.

Councillor Kimme?

Here.

Councillor Teeter?

Here.

Councillor Tivdon? Here. Mayor Beatty.

Here. And I am wearing a mask because I have a three-year-old in daycare and I am very sick. But given the weight of tonight's agenda items, I wanted to be in person. So out of respect of my colleagues, I am going to wear a mask to protect them this evening. On tonight's agenda, we will begin with visitor comments and then move to presentations, and then we have a pretty robust consent. Four public hearings, one action item, and one first reading, two work sessions, and we'll wrap up with any council new business. We will now move on to visitor comments. The city requires preregistration for online... In-person visitor comments at council meeting. Registration closed at noon today. All registration was conducted through the city recorder's office via email or phone in preparation for this meeting. There are seven people registered to comment at tonight's meeting. As a reminder, visitor comments provide the opportunity for the community to speak about matters, even if they are not on the agenda. Visitors state their comments and should... Visitors may state their comments and should not expect the council to engage in back and forth dialogue regarding the comments, as this is a time for the council to hear from the community. The city council seeks to be a welcoming and inclusive towards all speakers at public meetings, and we strive to create an atmosphere of mutual respect. While community members may disagree with each other or the city on issues and may give critical feedback, they are expected to do so respectively and without disruption. Disruptions interfere with the ability of other present and in-person or online to participate in this meeting. Council members do not interrupt community members during their public comment, and we expect community to offer the same courtesy to other speakers. Visitor comments are limited to three minutes. IF FOLLOW-UP IS NEEDED, OUR CITY MANAGER AND RECORDER ARE HERE TO TAKE NOTES. FIRST WE'LL HEAR FROM PETER FINLEY-FREY AND THEN SUSAN ROSENTHAL IS UP AFTER THAT.

hi my name is peter finley fry i'm a land use planner i didn't expect to be at the beginning of your agenda of a very long evening i was hoping to speak right before your workshop on the transportation plan we have a very small issue but it's very important and i'm here with car subaru And Brad Preple wanted to speak, but we didn't get organized to your formalities, so here I am representing them as well as myself. So we are here and we have talked to staff and staff has been agreeable to the suggestion, but we would like to do an area plan for the area around 115th Canyon Road, 114th and 117th. And the reason we wanna do that is because the current way you build right-of-ways does not work. building a right-of-way in an urban setting and expanding a right-of-way in an urban setting is a very, very difficult thing. And it has not been done very often or been done well. I use Milliken as an example. As you probably know, there's no sidewalk on Milliken on the north side between Hawken and Murray. There's no frontages on Milliken, the entire length of it. there are broken lots. Lots are legally conveyable to third parties, and the lots are actually broken in half by Milliken. So basically what you've done is you've put us right away through an error in fabric without addressing the consequences of those actions. And so we're asking you that prior to moving forward in the quasi judicial or capital improvements, we're asking you to do an area plan for the area that we're in so that we can address things like the light rail line and the need for protection of the gates for the way the streets work and how big they are and how they would work. um i oh thank you there's my timer so uh that's the end of basically our presentation what you do now and not just you but cities across the west coast does not work and we're asking that you do it differently and establish a different method which is to do a plan and figure out where the streets should go, how they should go, and how the uses should exist around the streets. I was going to ask you if you wanted to ask questions, but I know you have a long evening. I'm pretty sure you don't. So thank you very much for your time. And I'll have Wally Preble's letter in the record. Thank you.

And we got it via email. I know people read it as well. Oh, good.

Okay. Thank you for your time. Awesome. Thank you so much.

Susan Rosenthal? Buff Brown?

I believe Susan's online. Online. Okay.

Susan, if you're online, can you raise your hand? I don't see her, do you see her?

She was there, but not anymore, so.

Okay, we'll come back. Buff Brown. Barry Johnson Smith. Okay, is he granted, we'll grant you speaker privileges. Okay, Barry, you are granted, you can just come off mute.

You can hear me?

Yes. All right, cool.

All right. Hello, Council. My name is Brady Smith. I'm a resident of Beaverton, Oregon. I've been involved in various DNI and social community endeavors in Washington County. I'm giving testimony today to share support for the resolution, resolution number 4967. Thanks to our city ordinance policy, I think this resolution is a step in the right direction to address the fears and concerns the residents of Beaverton have had. Title of the act of immigration office in Beaverton, the action implemented in this resolution signals to residents that no one is above the law. that federal officers cannot come into the city and act recklessly to conduct their operations, and that there will be measures of accountability in place to make sure the act would be in local law. Any misconduct putting community members in harm's way is addressed. I want to first and foremost thank my team, Lance-Almonte Pearson, Danny Montoya, and Antonio Lopez for being great collaborators on developing the policy recommendations. that became the policy foundation for this resolution. We got our policy recommendations passed in Hillsborough and now it seems like we'll do it in Beaverton as well. I also want to thank Nadia Hassan for championing the amendments to the resolution with these public safety policy recommendations and for starting the process of having these policy recommendations discussed. And then I want to thank Kevin Teeter and John Duggar for hearing what I had about our policy recommendations and understanding our perspective to protect the public. Um, and I appreciate the working group who worked in these policies and the city manager as well for getting to develop, flesh them out, get the police to support this and convert them into action policy. Um, I do have one suggestion for the resolution and section nine, where I discussed the city manager, maintaining a reporting structure to keep council informed about immigration enforcement, how active reporting structure be, uh, available to the public, easily available to the public. It's important to make this reporting transparent so the public can be aware of the police and city staff interaction with federal immigration enforcement, and so we can build trust that city government is enforcing these sanctuary policies. Overall, I'm pleased with the policies being voted on today, and I again ask you to vote in favor of this resolution. Thank you.

Thank you. David Witter?

As you're all aware, we just celebrated the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. July 4th was the day that the representatives to the Congress passed the resolution to approve the Declaration of Independence. But the first time the declaration was read publicly was on July 8th in the town square in Philadelphia. And tomorrow we'll be celebrating the reading of that. at the Revolutionary War Memorial in Veterans Memorial Park. You're all welcome to join us. This reading is occurring simultaneously across the United States and all the territories and in a number of countries around the world that try to emulate and respond to the principles that are laid out in the Declaration of Independence. So we'll be starting at 2.30. John Adams will be transported from 250 years ago to the park, and he's going to talk about what it was like to try to put the Declaration together. And then we're going to simultaneously read the Declaration with communities across the country. So we appreciate the opportunity to be able to do that at the Revolutionary War Memorial in the Veterans Memorial Park. And thank you very much.

Thank you. It looks like we have Susan Rosenthal back online as well. So if we can grant her speaking privileges. OK. Susan, you have three minutes to address the council.

OK. Can you see me?

We can't see you, but we can hear you.

OK. So my name is Susan Rosenthal. And I live in unincorporated Washington County. and I am a bicyclist. I'm commenting about the update to the transportation plan. First, I wanted to say that I am pleased to see that the plan really emphasizes biking and walking and safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. I was hit by a truck, an F-350, when in December of 2025, when I was walking or riding actually my bike, I was at the intersection of King and Southwest Allen, and I was in the northbound lane on King and a car, an F-350 truck turned from Allen onto King and he turned into the wrong lane. So he was heading south, but he actually turned into the right, into the northbound lane and he crashed into me. Unfortunately, I wasn't seriously hurt, but this really motivated me to get more involved in transportation planning in Beaverton. So I did read the transportation plan update, and myself and another gentleman named Buff Brown had some comments, and we sent written comments. But I just wanted to emphasize a couple of things. One is that I would hope that in your engineering standards that you would adopt standards that promoted by the National Association of City Traffic Officials, which is different than the AASHTO standards that you currently use. Burn radiuses for Arterials are currently about 25 feet minimum in the AASHTO standards and the NACTO standards have them between five and 15 feet. So that's one example of how the NACTO standards promote safety over, you know, as opposed to the AASHTO standards. And the other thing I wanted to say is that I recently rode my bike in the area around Cooper Mountain. And I think that is really an area that needs a lot of attention because that was a frightening experience to ride on those roads south of Farmington Road up towards Cooper Mountain. So those are my two comments.

Thank you. Thank you. Zaria Dukes.

Good evening. My name is Zaria Dukes and I am a Beaverton resident. This is my first time speaking before the council. The last meeting did not sit well with me. When I prepared my testimony I had to step back and reflect and I think that's something we need to do. I had to sit with my own experience as a black woman navigating the world. And I'm asking this council and this administration to do the same. Sit, listen, reflect. When you eliminate the equity officer position, the public deserves real answers. What's the alternative and how are we maintaining connection and belonging for the people affected? I want to be fair. The city manager did offer an explanation and a commitment to report back monthly. I don't want to suggest she offered nothing, but a commitment to monthly updates is not a strategic plan. A strategic plan has timelines, a name owner, and measurable outcomes. Oregon has a documented history of excluding black residents from civic life. That history is why trust between communities of color and city government has to be actively built, not assumed. Systematic inequity today isn't explicit. It's knowing communities feel that they can't be in this room and not doing anything structural to change that. A monthly update isn't a structural response. A real plan is. The community deserves more than updates. They deserve a real plan with dates and names attached brought back to them directly. I believe in this council. I wholeheartedly believe in the mayor. I believe in the administration, but belief requires results. When decisions affect people's lives and their sense of belonging, come prepared. Come with a plan. Mayor Beatty, you said it yourself, clear is kind. I'm asking you to apply that standard here for the people of color in your community because it belongs to them too. I expect more than a monthly update and I'll be watching. Thank you.

Thank you. Blaine Soleimani Pearson.

Hi, my name is Blaine. I'm a resident of Beaverton, and thank you all for the time to speak. I want to speak specifically on my support for Resolution 4967, and I want to thank the Council specifically. I want to thank Councillors Kimme and Hassan for presenting the amendments to the Sanctuary Ordinance in January. I want to thank Councillors Duggar and Teeter for reaching out to ME AND MY TEAM TO TALK ABOUT THE ORDINANCE AND KIND OF WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE COMMUNITY. I'LL BE HONEST, I THOUGHT THAT REACHING THIS POINT WITH THIS RESOLUTION WAS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE SWEPT UNDER THE RUG AND WE WOULDN'T HEAR ABOUT IT AGAIN. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR HAVING IT HERE. I WANT TO THANK THE CITY MANAGER. Whoever was involved Beaverton police for that coordination just everyone all the people involved don't want to think it just for getting here So I hope you will vote for it and I think it's really amazing that nearly every thing mentioned in the document that me and my team presented is either adopted in some capacity or referenced. So even if it isn't adopted, there's policies referenced and where it already exists and why a new policy wasn't needed. This is not the be all end all to keep people safe, but it's enough to help people in the community that are in a panic and at risk. to know what the expectations are, to know what they can expect when they see Beaverton police out seemingly next to federal law enforcement. What are the expectations? What can we be looking for them to do? Now we know. Now we have this document, which is on my phone, which is why I'm lifting up my phone. So thank you all for working to get this here. I want to echo what Barry said earlier in for the reporting requirement. It would be great if there was some sort of digital dashboard or something that was just on a regular cadence, something people could go to. And so I hope to see that fleshed out more and that would be something that would be great to again help the anxiety in the community and just have something people can go to so thank you for taking this seriously thank you also for listening even through all the noise the yelling the emotions I know there were hurt feelings I know that people felt attacked or unsafe because people were reacting out of fear and pain and you didn't let that stop you from getting to this point so I hope you get it over the finish line we're not done yet hopefully you'll vote in favor of it but I want to thank you all for taking the time and working on it so thank you so much

I want to make sure that Buff Brown didn't join us online. Okay. All right. We are on to agenda item 26118, the Bicycle Advisory Committee Annual Report to the City Council. I've never seen you without a hat, so I didn't know. I didn't recognize you. Sorry about that.

Hello, everybody. We have all three. Okay. I am Lillian Mark, and I've been the chair of the Beaverton Bicycle Advisory Committee for the past couple of years now. This is my vice chair, Meg Olorski, and we got Dan Turk on the end. If you could go to the next slide, please. PICTURED HERE IS MORE OR LESS OUR 2025 LINEUP OF OUR MEMBERS. NOT PICTURED BUT ALMOST ALWAYS AT OUR MEETINGS ARE OUR BPD LIAISONS AND ALSO COUNCILOR TIVNON WHO WAS OUR 2025 liaison to the council. Next slide, please. This is our mandate to provide recommendations to the city on bicycle and related active transportation users in and around the city of Beaverton and provide city staff with general recommendations on bicycle and related active transportation, circulation, access and general use. Next slide, please. On to stuff we actually did in 2025. In 2025, we provided feedback on a number of projects at the city and also at the county, including the city's TSP update, traffic calming initiatives, specific improve improvements around Washington County, as well as acting as if I personally acted as an advisor on their community advisory committee for Washington County's transportation safety action plan update we also spent a lot of time learning about our city so we could provide better feedback and we spoke to city staff about let the landers land roost land use review process tree pruning and the street sweeping team next slide please Some of the more active things we did last year, we collected data for a map of all the bike parking facilities in downtown, a project we've actually discussed continuing. We had actually attended the Oregon Active Transportation Summit in 2025. We met with the Northwest Trail Alliance and also we had the opportunity to talk to some young entrepreneurs about an app that they had developed called the Bike Better app, which was extremely, it was wonderful to see young kids so involved. Next slide, please. On to 2026, we had our bike Beaverton event two months ago in May. It was wonderful to see Mayor Beatty and Councilor Duggar there. Love that. Love the support from you guys. Thank you so much. And despite the heat, 94 degrees, we actually had a pretty good turnout. 550 people between both our event and the young entrepreneurs market and about 200 250 people riding around with us which was actually i'm surprised the weather was so hot but it was we had better turnout this year than like a number of years uh recently which is really nice to see we had sort of our standard list of tables and vendors but instead of doing the pump track demo we went with the flip museum to entertain the kiddos This was the first time we had a survey after the event. The responses and statistics are on the slide. I will let you read them. I won't just rattle off numbers. What I will say is that a lot of the sentiments echoed what the BAC has been kind of saying and had ideas on for a while now, and it was really nice to sort of See people want to take this event in the same direction that we do And this sort of things like having either a theme or costumes and also more signage on the route. That's always a complaint Next slide. And on to 2026. Speaking of Mike Beaverton and those surveys, we will be using all of that information to try and continue to make the event better and better year over year. We will continue to advise on ongoing projects like the TSP update and the loop. We plan to help collect data for the Southwest Allen Boulevard project, and we're

we have created a subcommittee finally to plan and execute rides with other boards and commissions and i'll leave it to yeah i think one of our big plans for 2026 is to deepen the connection between the city of beaverton and the community and we think that bicycles are a great way to do that so we formed a ride planning subcommittee we have arrived this saturday the bike bus to the beaverton 10 tiny dances performance and It starts at 5 p.m. at Highland Park Middle School. It goes to Lara Ys Park, it goes to Evelyn Schiffler Park, and then it goes to the round for the performance. If you have anyone who wants to go to the 10 Tiny Dances performance and doesn't want to drive a car, we urge you to join us on that and look for more of that this summer.

Next slide, please. So the next few slides actually this and then the two next slides are rather wordy so I'm not going to read them all out to you guys but they are bullet points literally taken directly from our work plan on how our sort of goals align with all of your goals. And I wrote a huge thing, but I don't think I'll have time to read it all. So I'll just leave it at this. There are cities in this country where getting from place to place without personal vehicle is either harrowing or outright impossible. And as long as the Beaverton Bicycle Advisory Committee exists, it is our goal to make sure we don't become one of them. Thank you. That's all I've got.

Sweet. Well, thank you for joining us. I would say my little in the bike trailer on that day had a hard time. I had to cut it short a little bit. Councilor Teeter texted me in the morning and said that it was too hot and he was embarrassed he couldn't finish, so he didn't join us this year. But next year, I'm going to encourage him to join us because he hardly rides a bike. And a huge proponent of themes, like if we can do a theme, we're going to get more people out there. We need more fun community gathering opportunity, onesies, unicorns, whatever you want to do, just some suggestions. Councilor Tivnon, have I ever seen you ride a bike? Oh, Councilor Titor wants to talk. Fine, Councilor Titor.

Throw a shade and then skip me. Thank you all for your work. The Bike Beaverton event is really great. I was really sad to miss it this year. Thank you for your feedback and input on all of the other transportation planning we're working through right now. I think this is a really, really important time for a lot of work that the city's doing. So having y'all's voices at the table is really, really essential and very, very helpful. So thank you for that. I do hope to be present at more of y'all's events and activities. My daughter is just getting on a bike now, so I'll be able to get out there more with her. And thank you for your work and keep it up.

Councillor Tiffin.

Same, same to what he said. And also, it was just a pleasure attending the meetings with you. This is one of those committees where the perspective that each of the members of the back brings to the city is extremely valuable, especially at this point in time when we're developing the TSP. You're out there on the streets. You have firsthand knowledge of what's going on. That is critical information and just the passion for biking and wanting to contribute your time to informing what the city does in terms of shaping a safer environment for it is highly valued. So it was a pleasure being your liaison and thank you for the report.

Council President. I get to be the current liaison, although this is my second time. It's kind of what I want to mention is not about your reporting, but I attended meetings before I was in council. My first year, I got to be the liaison. And this year, so I've actually seen the group not only grow, in its conversations, but in its technical sophistication. We have planners, basically. I know Mick is a recent graduate, but like the level of sophistication and the advice you're giving us on a regular basis, not just on the presentations, I find it incredibly illuminating. And we have an unofficial bike caucus on the city council for the first time probably ever. Many of us ride our bikes a lot, certainly Councilor Titor. That doesn't happen by accident. I just want to acknowledge that yes, you guys are doing work, but you're being noticed and it's affecting a lot of things. And I just want to echo the thanks for that and keep pushing because this is changing this city and I'm incredibly proud of the work. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilor Husson.

Yeah, I actually had the opportunity to be the bike advisory commission liaison when I was first elected, which is like, I don't want to say the coolest because I know I'll offend like another board commission, but one of the coolest opportunities to learn about just biking. And so I want to commend the work you guys are doing. I want to encourage more of those community bike rides. I'm really excited to hear about the Highland Park one. I would also love to see it go closer to North Beaverton, just me pitting my little two cents. I live in North Beaverton and we don't always get a lot of that action. And I think as we're watching things happen at the federal government, at the state government, like loneliness is becoming an epidemic. And I do think there's something really critical about community building and community building and biking. And so I really appreciate that you're doing that. So thank you.

If people join the bike ride to 10 Tiny Dances, is there going to be expanded bike parking? There's only a couple.

I would like that to be the case. There's nothing currently in the works. We're working. This is a test run for the night market bike bus, and we are hoping to have a bike valet again through the Westside Transportation Alliance. Okay. Awesome. Thanks for joining us this evening.

Thank you.

OK, we do have a pretty lengthy consent, and we've had two items being pulled from that this evening. So we'll take consent and then take the two pulled items.

Thank you, Mayor. I move to approve the council consent agenda and the contract review board with the exception of agenda bill 26122 and 26128. Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion on the motion?

I'll just jump in really quick and say the consent agenda includes the May primary election results. I'm just really excited to have two of our colleagues back in here working with us for another four years.

All right. Seeing no other discussion, will the recorder call the roll?

Councilor Duggar?

Yes.

Councilor Hartmeyer-Prick? Yes.

Councilor Hassan? Yes. Councilor Kimme? Yes. Councilor Teeter? Yes. Councilor Tivnon? Yes. Mayor Beatty? Yes. Seven yes, zero no. Motion carries.

Okay, let's take the pulled consent in order. What's the first one? 122. Councilor Hassan, that's yours.

Yeah, so I pulled boards and commissions work plans. What I shared with staff, and I'm curious what you all think, is without knowing what's happened with the, without knowing the outcome of the Diversity Advisory Board and the Human Rights Advisory Commission, like I would shift my feedback on the work plan, and so I don't want to not signal that boards and commissions don't keep doing that work, and CAN WE POTENTIALLY WAIT THROUGH THE SUMMER, GET SOME FEEDBACK IN OR GET AN UPDATE ON THAT AND THEN PASS IT OR AT MINIMUM MAKE SURE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE IN A CONVERSATION BECAUSE IF THE DIVERSITY ADVISORY BOARD AND HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY COMMISSION COULD ACTUALLY TRULY BE SUNSET, THEN IT CHANGES WHAT I WANT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WORKING ON COMPLETELY.

City manager what would a delay in the adoption of this and then what's the plan for? DAB and a track

So we plan to come to council in the fall to provide an overview of boards and commissions as a whole. We have some outdated bylaws related to boards and commissions and we have some findings from the boards and commissions assessment that we want to share with you and get feedback on. And one of the things that we do want to get feedback on and we're currently working on ENGAGING ABOUT IS DAB AND HRAC AND SO THAT'S OUR DIVERSITY ADVISORY BOARD AND OUR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION FOR ANYONE LISTENING THAT ISN'T FAMILIAR WITH THOSE ACRONYMS. SO WE DO PLAN ON COMING TO COUNCIL TO PROVIDE A WORK SESSION TO YOU IN THE FALL AND THAT'S THAT CHANCE TO REALLY LOOK AT YOUR OVERALL STRUCTURE OF YOUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS and make any changes that you deem fit. And so the work plans before you tonight are a result of feedback that we've gotten from members of the boards and commission that would like to make sure that they're aligned with council and the work that they're doing. They would also like to have their work plans set early on in the fiscal year. And so that is why we have been bringing those to you tonight. And we've been focusing on kind of the active boards and commissions that we have currently and getting those work plans done. So if council wishes to postpone that, then we would need to wait until later in the fall after we have the work session on the boards and commission bylaws changes.

So as a refresher for those that may be tuning in for the first time, as part of the city council change of government, we wanted to align the board and commission work plan based off the city council's agenda. But since boards and commissions FALL UNDER THE CITY MANAGER, NOT THE ELECTED SIDE. THE CITY MANAGER IS THE ONE THAT PRODUCES THE WORK PLANS FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS TO MOVE UP. I, TOO, WANT TO SEE A LARGER CONVERSATION AROUND DAB AND A TRACK, BUT I DON'T FEEL PREPARED TO SLOW DOWN THE WORK FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS OF THE CURRENT VOLUNTEERS RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M HAPPY TO HEAR FROM EVERYONE ELSE.

COUNCILOR HARTMEYER-PRING.

THANK YOU. I WAS STUCK. I THINK HEARING FEEDBACK FROM COUNSEL HUSSAN AND THE COMMENTS WE HEARD TONIGHT FROM MS. DUKES, I THINK THAT THESE WORK PLANS NEED TO ACTUALLY HAVE A LOT MORE CALLED OUT ABOUT OUR DIVERSITY EQUITY INCLUSION PLANS BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID TALK ABOUT DURING BUDGET WAS HOW MUCH THE EXTERNAL FACING COMMUNITY BUILDING SIDE OF THAT WORK IS SO IMPORTANT. I APPRECIATE THAT IT WOULD DELAY THEM HAVING THESE PLANS. I DON'T THINK THERE'S PROBLEMS WITH THESE PLANS. THERE'S PROBABLY JUST MORE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED INTO IT. I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH THESE SO LONG AS THE FUTURE CONVERSATION AND ADDING AMENDING THESE ESSENTIALLY TO INCLUDE A LOT MORE ABOUT OUR DIVERSITY EQUITY INCLUSION GOALS AND COMMITMENT AS A CITY AND I THINK THIS TIES NICELY INTO THE COMMUNITY ASKER AND WHAT IS THE PLAN FURTHER AND IT'S A PLAN THAT I THINK WE ARE ALSO COMMITTED TO. HELPING DEVELOP, HELP CHAMPION. THAT'S WHERE I AM. I THINK IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT CONVERSATION. THANK YOU FOR PULLING IT. I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE MOVING IT FORWARD, BUT WITH THE CAVEAT THAT AT THAT WORK SESSION, WE ARE HELPING FORM WHATEVER ELSE AND THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY ADD INTO THESE WORK PLANS THOSE GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE IN THERE.

Yeah, I'll second what Councillor Hartmar-Prick just stated, that I'll support moving forward tonight, but looking forward to future conversation about DAP and human rights, because they've been waiting for two years now, and we haven't really give them a feedback, so we should, so that's what I want to do.

Councillor Teeter.

Thanks. Thank you. And I appreciate what Councilor Sarton can be just shared too. I don't want to slow down the work of the boards and commissions that they've already got planned here. So I want to be able to keep that moving forward. I do think the conversation is really important about the future of diversity advisory board, human rights advisory commission. and so if it's like a mid-year adjustment we ask of our current boards and commissions to include some more information about how they would be involved in more external or internally focused equity work while we wait while we figure out what we're doing with those other two boards the dab and a track i would be interested in the mid-year update but I think some of that direction might come from us in a work session. Elizabeth, is the work session, you said fall, does that mean September or does it mean like November? What's the, do we know the timeline?

We haven't picked a specific date on that, so we can come back to you, but yeah, our goal is to get feedback from council on both the boards and commissions as well as kind of our equity framework and our plans for the equity program going forward. And that's kind of two separate things.

potential work sessions or briefings okay thank you so i think on my mind i would say if we were able to get that conversation earlier so that boards and commissions can adjust or add a little detail before the start of the second half of the fiscal year i think that would be nice but i don't know the internal workload capacity of our staff to actually do that work and get it on our agenda but i think in an ideal world that's kind of where i would be

YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE COUNCIL GOALS INCLUDES EQUITY. I THINK PROBABLY WHAT I GRAPPLE WITH IS LIKE THE WORK PLAN DOESN'T MAYBE SAY IT IS IN MUCH DETAIL AS WE WOULD WANT. I MEAN, THE SAME WITH SUSTAINABILITY. IT'S A HIGH PRIORITY FOR THE COUNCIL. AND SO I JUST THINK OPPORTUNITIES FOR DOCUMENTS THAT COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO REALLY HIGHLIGHT THE AREAS WHERE WE SEE OUR INPUT INTO IT I THINK WOULD HELP MOVE THINGS ALONG QUICKLY. I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IS A HOT TOPIC FOR THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE GIVEN A LOT OF DELEGATION TO STAFF BECAUSE WE UNDERSTAND THE WORKLOAD, BUT THIS IS THE NUMBER ONE VOLUNTEER SOURCE OF THE CITY. THERE ARE COMMUNITY ADVOCATES. IT IS HOW ALMOST EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US GOT ON THE CITY COUNCIL. We need to make sure that their work is valued. And one of the things I've heard over and over again from every board I visited this year is they feel like they're kind of rudderless. So this gives them a piece of that, which is why I want to move forward. So they feel a little bit tethered, but it's not the end all work. We need to see, you know, 10 tiny dances has a lot of equity in it. AND HOW WE ADDRESS THE COMMUNITY IN IT. WE JUST DON'T SEE IT IN THIS DOCUMENT. I THINK IT WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL IN THE WORK PLAN THAT COMES BACK TO US OR THE WORK SESSION TO KIND OF SPELL OUT WHERE IN THIS SOME OF THAT IS HAPPENING. I KNOW COUNSELOR HARTMEYER, COUNSELOR HUSSEN CARES DEEPLY. I THINK HAVING HER HELP OR OVERLOOK AT SOME OF THE DOCUMENTS COMING FORWARD TO THE WORK SESSION WOULD BE HELPFUL. COUNSELOR HUSSEN.

Yeah, I'll just tack on. I mean, thank you. I don't want to stop this work. So I am comfortable voting yes tonight with the caveat that we know that there's going to be flexibility around these plans. And I do think that, I mean, Mayor Beatty kind of said it. Like, these are our number one groups of people who volunteer and give their time. Thank you for those of you who are here with us today. them having an approved work plan is just as important as us feeling like we've given input and feedback and so when I saw in consent I kind of was like oh but like I know we have a lot tonight and I'm also watching the time so I thank you for your support I hope that we can just make sure we're continuing to have the conversation because I do think that there is more equity work baked in these work plans we just need to be more calling it out and identifying it but then also making sure we're communicating to boards and commissions what's happening and I would like it to be more of a two-way conversation and less of a here's a plan we're approving so however we can design that in the earlier part of fall as is possible would I would really appreciate so thanks

Well, and I think, too, it's important. They did a whole work. The boards and commissions did their own retreat on some of this, and it would be helpful for us to know the outcome. I went and spoke at it, but bounced when they were doing it. So that would be helpful for the council to hear. Council President?

Yep, I'm in agreement with what... The only thing I would add, and there are some boards and commission members in this room, many of us have served before being on this council. Councillor Kimme, I believe, was one of the original members of DAB and the Night Market, right? If you're out there, don't wait on us, right? Like, you can do some of this work now. You know it's coming. THEY DIDN'T WAIT ON THE CITY COUNCIL TO DO THE NIGHT MARKET. IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. IT WAS INCLUSIVE. IT WAS FOCUSED ON EQUITY. SO I'M CHALLENGING OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSION MEMBERS. WE WILL WEIGH IN, BUT DO THIS WORK.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT, WE'RE GIVING THEM A WORK PLAN AND YOU'RE TELLING THEM TO IGNORE THE WORK PLAN. STAFF IS GOING TO FOLLOW YOU TO YOUR CAR. IGNORE WHAT HE SAID. UNLESS IT'S A REALLY GREAT IDEA, THEN WE'LL TAKE CREDIT FOR IT FOR SURE. ALL RIGHT, CITY RECORDER, LET'S TAKE A VOTE.

This is for Agenda Bill 26122. Oh, do we need a motion?

Yeah. Oh, we do need a motion. We need a motion. Oh, okay. Move that we accept Agenda Bill 26122.

Second.

All right, I'll give the second to Councillor Husson. Any more discussion on the motion? All right, let's call the roll.

Duggar.

Yes.

Councillor Hartmeyer-Prigg. Yes. Councillor Hassan. Yes. Councillor Kimme. Yes. Councillor Teeter. Yes. Councillor Tivnon. Yes. Mayor Beatty.

Yes.

Motion passes seven yes, zero no.

All right. Our second pulled item, Councillor Kimme.

Yes, I pulled this item, not specified to PDA, but to all the contracts that we do or for service agreements that we do. I expect the supplemental budgets will come at the end of the year. If there's any changes, are we obligated to not fully fund or are we obligated to fully fund the entire year? That was my question. It applies to all the organizations that we contract out.

Councilor Kimme, if we were to have budget reductions later in the year and lose that appropriation, it will depend on the specific agreement that we have, but generally we can work on a potential budget amendment and staff would consider that in terms of whether or not we would propose that as a future reduction.

So it depends on each agreement?

I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TO ALL OF THE SERVICE AGREEMENTS THAT WE HAVE ACROSS THE CITY BECAUSE EACH CONTRACT HAS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT CLAUSES, BUT GENERALLY THERE IS SOME SORT OF PROVISION WHERE IF THE CITY LOSES BUDGET APPROPRIATION THAT WE HAVE A WAY TO AMEND THE CONTRACT OR REDUCE THE CONTRACT AS NEEDED.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

WHAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL?

MOVE TO APPROVE AGENDA BILL 26128.

Second. It's been moved and seconded. Any more discussion on the motion?

Sorry, I'll just make a quick comment. I meant to drop in the chat, but I thought I'd get in there faster. I do love this partnership, and I just hope that as we continue to develop these relationships, we're really focusing on some of our small businesses. I know our small businesses are really struggling. I see that in the contract. I just want to call it out because I think it's really important tonight, so thanks.

Will the recorder call the roll?

This is for Agenda Bill 26128. Councillor Duggar? Yes. Councillor Hart, Mayor Prigg? Yes. Councillor Hassan? Yes. Councillor Kimme? Yes. Councillor Teeter? Yes. Councillor Tivnon? Yes. Mayor Beatty? Yes. 7 yes, 0 no. Motion carries.

OKAY. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE INTO OUR PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THE EVENING. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION 4950, WATER RATES. I WILL SOON OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON WATER RATES. THEN WE WILL HEAR A SHORT PRESENTATION FROM FINANCE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR SUSAN COLE. After the staff presentation, I will open the floor to any comments from the public on water rates. Anyone wishing to speak at this hearing should follow the instructions included on tonight's agenda. For those in person, please complete a yellow visitor card found at the table near the door at the back of the council chambers. and give the card to the city reporter who's lurking behind me, but we'll be sitting at the end of the dais soon. Each member of the public will have three minutes to speak, and when you speak, please give your name and city of residence for the record. Council members may ask questions of anyone who speaks to us tonight, the city attorney or the staff, if that will help the council member make a decision. Before we open the public hearing, I need to make a statement regarded by state law that the legislature requires of local officials. Water rates and sewer rates affect me like they do every other Beaverton resident. State ethic laws require disclosure called the Declaration of Conflict of Interest when a local government decision has a direct financial impact on the people making decision. When a majority of the council members have actual conflicts, the council will not be allowed to discuss the rates or respond to comments. That means we may listen to your comments, but we cannot respond. However, we will be able to vote unless two or more city councilors are not on the city's water, in which case, there will only be one vote. Hopefully we'll have a better solution next year. However, the bottom line is transparency matters even when the law is imperfect, even when it applies to cities, but apparently does not apply to the legislature who made this law and are forcing us to do it. Therefore, I, by the state ordinance, am declaring a conflict of interest for both water rates and sewer rates because I am a Beaverton water resident and a sewer rate payer. Now, when you hear conflict of interest, it makes like we're getting something. I have to pay the same rate. This is not a conflict of interest like I pay less and residents pay more, and I would hope that you write to the legislature and ask them to help us fix this. Now, do you have a conflict of interest, Kevin Teeter?

I do. I'm on both city water and sewer. Yes.

Thank you, Mayor. I am declaring an actual conflict of interest for both water and sewer because I am a Beaverton water and sewer rate payer.

I declare the same actual conflict of interest for sewer rates, but I am not on city water.

So does she get to ask questions then on behalf of all of us?

No, Mayor, because everyone else does have.

I'm just clarifying. Councillor Kimme.

I declare the same actual conflict for both water and sewer rates.

I declare the same actual conflict for both water and sewer rates.

I declare the same actual conflict for both water and sewer rates as I am a rate payer.

AS YOU CAN TELL ALL OF US LIVE IN THE CITY LIMITS AND HAVE WATER AND SEWER HOOKED UP TO OUR HOUSE SO THE STATE LEGISLATURE IS NOT ALLOWING US TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER THIS EVENING. I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON WATER RATES. WE WILL HEAR A SHORT PRESENTATION FROM THE FINANCE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR SUSAN COLE. ARE YOU THE ONLY ONE THAT WORKS IN FINANCE?

No, I am supported by a team of individuals Thank you so much mayor City Council And just for the record for curiosity, we actually have four water districts within Beaverton city limits so one counselor is a customer of a different water district and so I am here tonight to present a brief PowerPoint regarding our water rate approval and And as the mayor mentioned, a recent change in state law has meant changes to how the city council discusses rates, fees, and charges. And until staff can clarify this with the state on how to proceed, this is the mechanism that we're using. As the mayor mentioned, we won't be hearing responses to public comments tonight. AS IT IS NOT ALLOWED UNDER STATE LAW, GIVEN THAT THE RATE INCREASES AFFECT THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. IN THE MEANTIME, A PUBLIC HEARING THAT WAS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 16TH FOR THE WATER, STORM, AND SEWER RATES WAS POSTPONED UNTIL TONIGHT, JULY 7TH. ON JUNE 16TH, WE INSTEAD HELD A WORK SESSION ON THESE RATES AND HELD A DISCUSSION TO CONDUCT DUE DILIGENCE AROUND THESE PLAN RATE INCREASES. FOR WATER RATES, THE COUNCIL DISCUSSED MANY TOPICS. SO JUST A BRIEF RECAP OF WHAT WE DISCUSSED ON JUNE 16. ONE TOPIC DISCUSSED WAS COST CONTAINMENT WITH AN EYE TOWARD MITIGATING RATE INCREASES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. STAFF REPLIED ON THAT EVENING BY STATING THAT ONLY ONE QUARTER OF ONE FTE IS ADDED IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR 2027, AND THAT IS FOR THE UTILITY TEAM IN FINANCE TO TIMELY RESPOND TO CUSTOMERS. We have many customers who are curious about the new automated water meters being installed, and so our staff take time to answer those questions. We have no quotas in terms of how long it takes a staff member to answer customer questions, so some calls are taking 15, 20 minutes, which is fine. They're able to engage those customers in those questions. We've also seen an uptick in move-in and move-out requests, and so that also adds to this additional staff member. The utility does review its expenses thoughtfully each and every year. Council also inquired about the minimum reserves required for this water utility fund and whether or not that is driving the rate increase, to which staff replied that the minimum fund balance for the water utility is 42% of operating costs. And even with this proposed rate increase, the fund will not meet that. It will instead be at 39% projected at fiscal year end. However, staff are comfortable with this lower amount for now, and it is not a driver of the rate increase at this time. The discussion also briefly touched on the impact of population growth, meaning that if we have more customers, maybe that would add more revenue and then hence mitigate a rate increase. But that population growth has been less than 1% per year. And as I mentioned, we do have a number of water districts within city limits. Staff explained that the major rate driver of the water increase is to ensure sufficient financial resources to repay debt obligations, two of which are scheduled to begin in the subsequent fiscal year in fiscal 28. And that would be the payback of the $81 million WIFI loan and the $20 million state of Oregon. And those loans are in addition to water revenue bonds that are issued by the city. So this is why the rate increases are a little bit higher than typical inflation increases. And as for the debt covenants, we are required to bring in a stable revenue that is 25% more than operating costs so that our bondholders can ensure that we meet our debt obligations. Ultimately, the council discussed the rate increase as a result of past once-in-a-generation decisions made to secure the city water rights, to ensure resiliency during natural disasters, and to take advantage of low-interest loans. Other agencies in the region are increasing their rates as well, and because of Beaverton's foresight to make these once-in-a-generation investments, over time our rates will stay the course of the more inflationary increase. So for the storm and sewer rates, just as briefly mentioned, staff explained that cost pressures for the maintenance crews and pipe replacements are leading to these rate increases. The city at this time follows the rates imposed by clean water services that are imposed in the unincorporated Washington County, but we are currently undergoing a study of our sewer and storm utilities, and we plan to come back to the city council in the fall with results of that rate study. And with that, I'll turn briefly to this PowerPoint just for some exhibits. So if you can go to the next slide, please. So this exhibit here shows the water fund debt service and the rate planning that we do. So this just illustrates how our debt service will be increasing in the coming years and how the consumption rate for our water utility does need to increase in order to meet those obligations. And so the little note there on the PowerPoint does say that we are investing 378 million in our water utility, and this is financed through a number of debt instruments that I mentioned earlier. And so that is the main driver of our consumption rate increases. Next slide, please. This slide here illustrates the rate change that we're proposing. So we do have a fixed monthly charge, and that is dependent upon the size of the meter. And so that is what is on the left side of the screen. You can see the different meter sizes, what the current monthly meter charge is, what the proposed is, and then the percent change and dollar change. On the right side, we see the consumption rate, and that is per unit, which is 1 ccf, or 100 cubic feet of water, which equals 748 gallons. So there you can see the change in that rate. Even with this change, our consumption rate is one penny per gallon. Next slide, please. This exhibit here shows you some bill examples of what we might expect a customer to pay. We typically use as an example a household that would use eight units. That's an industry standard. So if a customer were to use eight units of water, their monthly bill would grow by $7.30 per month. You can see the other examples there. We have a two-person household. As an example, their bill would change by $4.90. A seven-person household would see their bill change by $9.70 per month. And then we have a couple commercial examples here. A restaurant, which is classified as a fast, casual restaurant without a drive-thru, WOULD CHANGE BY $68.08, AND THEN A RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT UP BY THE 158TH FRED MEYER THAT SELLS TIRES, THEIR WATER BILL WOULD CHANGE BY $21.88 PER MONTH, JUST TO GIVE SOME EXAMPLES OF THOSE CHANGES. AND SO THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND AS I UNDERSTAND, COUNCILOR HOTMIGHT-PRIGG MIGHT BE THE ONLY ONE THAT COULD ASK A QUESTION IN THIS INSTANCE. So, and I do not have a presentation for the sewer rates.

Thank you for the recap of the last city council work session where we did able to ask a lot more questions. And there was members of the audience very upset at us that they didn't get to testify, but we're trying to make it work with the state law. So thank you for the recap. I appreciate that. okay um since there are no questions from the staff to council we do have one person here to speak on the proposed resolution uh david savage please don't forget to give your name and state uh if you're a beaverton resident for the record

Perfect. Name is Dave Savage. I'm a Beaverton resident, also a business owner, and a member of a homeowners association condo on the corner of Hart and Murray. Talked to you before, and first of all, thank you for all the work you do. I know this is a complex issue, and I do appreciate the quality of our water here in Oregon, and the fact that Beaverton's made steps to ensure that for our longevity. I'm only here to put a face to a community that gets hit Exponentially hard with water rate increases not because of necessarily what we do but because of where we live our community was built in 1972 where they didn't care that much about water and so we have those big water mains and we irrigate our grounds we live on grounds that are little less than 12 acres 56 units absolutely gorgeous they wouldn't do that today because there's nowhere near enough housing close together where we live so consequently we can't really change our water mains we're one of the big ones so all those fixed rates that we can't change that hits our community pretty hard and we really can't stop watering it's not just grass in our community it's GROUNDS AND LANDSCAPING AND IT'S BEAUTIFUL AND GRANTED WE ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR THAT BECAUSE WE LIVE THERE BUT WE CAN'T STOP WATERING IT BECAUSE IT WILL DIE AND IF IT DIES OUR PROPERTY VALUES GO DOWN AND ALSO WE HAVE A WONDERFUL KINDLING UNDERNEATH ALL THE GIANT DUG FURS THAT WE LIVE IN SO IT BECOMES PRETTY MUCH A FIRE HAZARD. SOME OF OUR GARAGES WE HAVE YET TO REPLACE THE SHINGLES ON THERE'S STILL CEDAR SHAKE AND SO FORTH. We've done all we can with efficiency of our systems. We've upgraded it. We've done tree maintenance and everything. And that's pretty much it. Just a face and a community where it's like when we do have these rate increases, our people have their own personal water. And then they also have the water bill from our community, which... AGAIN, WE APPRECIATE WHERE WE LIVE, BUT IT'S SIGNIFICANT. IN LISTENING TO THE REPORT WE JUST HEARD, YOU'RE WELCOME, BECAUSE WE CONTRIBUTE A LOT TO PAYING OFF THAT DEBT. THAT'S MY ONLY COMMENTS. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO AND FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO ME.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. THE SECOND HARDEST JOB IN THE STATE NEXT TO A MAYOR IS AN HOA PRESIDENT, SO YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU. OKAY. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. WHAT IS THE WISH OF THE COUNCIL? Page eight.

Mayor, I move the council adopt resolution 4958, a resolution establishing the water consumption rate and monthly meter charges and repealing resolution number 4920. I'll second.

It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? I know, but I have to ask. It's part of Robert's rules. Will the recorder please call the roll?

Councilor Duggar?

Yes.

Councilor Hartmeyer-Prigg? Yes. Councilor Hassan?

No.

Councilor Kimme?

Yes.

Councilor Teeter? Yes. Councilor Tivnon? Yes. Mayor Beatty?

Yes.

Six yes, one no. Motion carries.

Okay. Resolution number 4959, a resolution establishing the sewer and storm rates and charges repealing resolution 4921. The next item on the agenda is a public hearing on resolution 4959, a resolution establishing the sanitary sewer and stormwater rates changes and repeals resolution 4921. I will soon open the public hearing on the sewer and stormwater rates. Then we will have, we are here a short presentation from again, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR SUSAN COLE. AFTER THE STAFF PRESENTATION, I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR TO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TONIGHT SHOULD FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS GO IN THE BACK, FILL OUT A YELLOW CARD, GIVE IT TO THE RECORDER AT THE END OF THE DIAS. WHEN YOU SPEAK, GIVE YOUR NAME, CITY OF RESIDENCE FOR THE RECORD. COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF PRESENTERS, THE CITY ATTORNEY OR STAFF. Conflict disclosures regarding the sewer rates were made during the previous public hearing on water as a reminder This means according to your state legislature We cannot discuss the sewer rates or your comments, but they are happy to hear your comments so please email them and Then we will be able to vote and I think Susan is about to do a recap as our last meeting where we had a work session

YES, THANK YOU. I ACTUALLY DID GIVE A BRIEF RECAP OF THE STORE AND STORM WATER RATES IN MY PREVIOUS COMMENTS THAT THE COUNCIL ASKED QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STAFF INCREASES AND PIPE REPLACEMENTS FOR STORE AND STORM AND WE'LL BE COMING BACK IN THE FALL WITH A CONSULTANT STUDY ON THOSE RATES.

ALL RIGHT. I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE STAFF? WHICH WE CAN'T ASK. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL THIS EVENING? There appears to be no additional comments from the Council tonight. I now close the public hearing. Do we have a motion?

Thank you, Mayor. I move the City Council adopt Resolution 4959, establishing the sanitary sewer and stormwater rates and charges and repealing Resolution 4921.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded. There will be no discussion. Will the recorder please call the roll?

Councillor Duggar?

Yes.

Councillor Hartmeyer-Prick? Yes. Councillor Husson? Yes. Councillor Kimme? Yes. Councillor Teeter?

Yes.

Councillor Tivnon? Yes. Mayor Beatty? Yes. 7 yes, 0 no. Motion carries.

I think it's important for the record that the mayors across the region advocated fiercely around these ethic law changes because this does not move transparency forward. This makes it very difficult for residents to understand where we're at. And it was in part of the bill that the governor vetoed had this in it as well. So this was definitely not the doing of the city council. I just want to make sure that community members understand that. The next item on the agenda is another public hearing, but don't worry, we can talk in this one. On ordinance number 4881, an ordinance amending Beaverton code chapter 2.09 and creating a general services fee and a resolution establishing the amount of general services fee. Anyone wishing to speak at this hearing should follow the instructions that we've already gone over. Go to the back of the room, get a yellow card, hand it to the city recorder at the end of the dais. Each member will have three minutes. If you speak, give your name, city of residence. Council members may ask questions of you, the city attorney or staff, if it will help us make a decision. Is there a staff presentation?

YES, MAYOR. ELIZABETH COFFEE, INTERIM CITY MANAGER, AND I'M JOINED BY SUSAN COLE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR BECAUSE SHE LOVES NUMBERS SO MUCH. WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO TALK ABOUT THE GENERAL SERVICES FEE, AND WE HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION TO GIVE YOU TONIGHT, BUT FOR ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE TODAY OR WATCHING ONLINE, I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT COUNCIL HAS DISCUSSED THIS FEE AT LENGTH OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, AND WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING MULTIPLE WORK SESSIONS. COUNCIL HAS DONE SIGNIFICANT DUE DILIGENCE TO EVALUATE FEE STRUCTURES, ALTERNATIVES, AND OPTIONS, AND THAT'S LED US TO THE PUBLIC HEARING HERE TONIGHT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS ON THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE, RIGHT, NOT THE GENERAL MAINTENANCE FEE?

GENERAL SERVICES FEE. STREET MAINTENANCE FEE IS COMING UP NEXT.

Okay, but it's out of order in this script that I just read. Didn't I just read it's for the street maintenance fee?

Okay. Yeah.

Sorry to, we got to switch it up. It's an out of order in the, well, both of them say street maintenance fee. Okay.

I think the agenda has the general services fee first. Doesn't really matter to us. We can flip to the street maintenance fee.

No, no, no, it's fine. I think as long as the city recorder has the,

I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT I READ. I THINK I READ THIS CREATING THE GENERAL SERVICES.

IT HAS THE SAME TITLE.

TONIGHT WE WILL GO OVER WHY A GENERAL SERVICES FEE. WE WILL TALK ABOUT EXPENSES THAT WE HAVE REDUCED BEFORE EVALUATING THIS REVENUE TOOL. WE WILL TALK ABOUT WHAT THE FEE SUPPORTS AND THEN GO OVER FEE DETAILS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AT THE END OF THE DAY, AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, YOU CAN SEE HERE THE RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION HERE ON THE SCREEN TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE THAT CHANGES THE CODE TO AUTHORIZE COLLECTION OF THIS FEE AND THE RESOLUTION THAT WILL SET THE AMOUNT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. So why consider a general services fee? Next slide please. This graph will look very familiar to those of you that have been tuning in over the last several months. But Oregon is a very unique state in the way that it collects property taxes. The growth of property taxes is constrained and also there is a broken link between the real market value of the home and the assessed value which is what homes and properties are taxed on. AND SO MANY RESIDENTS ARE NOT AWARE THAT THE CITY OF BEAVERTON ONLY RECEIVES 21 CENTS OUT OF EVERY PROPERTY TAX DOLLAR TO FUND REALLY CRITICAL SERVICES LIKE PUBLIC SAFETY, OUR LIBRARY, PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, ET CETERA, AND AS YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE SCREEN, MANY OTHER AGENCIES ALSO RECEIVE A SLICE OF THAT PROPERTY TAX FUNDING. And so the challenges that we have are that the revenue is not keeping pace with our expenses on average. Our property taxes grow anywhere from 3 to 3.8 per year, percent per year, and our expenses are growing at 6, 6.17 percent per year. WHY ARE EXPENSES GROWING? THEY ARE NOT GROWING BECAUSE WE ARE ADDING LOTS OF NEW PROGRAMS AND STAFF. THEY ARE GROWING BECAUSE LARGELY THINGS OUTSIDE OF OUR CONTROL. OUR HEALTHCARE COSTS INCREASED ON AVERAGE 8% OVER THE LAST YEAR. WE FACED A 7% INCREASE IN RETIREMENT COSTS. DESPITE MAKING REDUCTIONS TO EXPENSES IN MATERIALS AND SERVICES, THOSE COSTS HAVE INCREASED AS WELL. WE ARE FACING THAT STRUCTURAL ISSUE IN OUR GENERAL FUND WHERE OUR REVENUE IS NOT KEEPING PACE WITH THE EXPENSES. As a result, Council has been working over the last several years to address this problem. And over the last year or so has been talking at length about updating the Council's Fiscal Sustainability Action Plan, which has a number of strategies to tackle this problem. And you can see here on the screen that there is no one magic solution to this issue. AND COUNCIL HAS REALLY CHOSEN TO TAKE A BLENDED APPROACH IN THE SHORT TERM TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. AND THAT INVOLVES A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT STRATEGIES. ONE OF THEM IS THE GENERAL SERVICES FEE OR THE PUBLIC SERVICES FEE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT AS WELL AS THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE THAT WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT IN A LITTLE BIT. WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT A POTENTIAL LOCAL OPTION LEVY AND THEN WE'VE ALSO TALKED ABOUT REDUCING EXPENSES AS WELL. WE HAVE A SOFT HIRING FREEZE IN PLACE. and are really thoughtfully evaluating the services that we offer. And then we have a number of short-term and long-term actions to really address the core issues around that structural deficit, including property tax reform and looking at things like our healthcare design and potential future cost sharing with our employees. Next slide, please. So you can see here on the screen our general fund forecast. We did just adopt the fiscal year 26-27 budget, so we have not yet updated this forecast for the current fiscal year. But you can see here on the screen, the top half of the graph, the total expenditures are the orange line. and the expenses are the blue line and you can see over on the left side of the screen that those lines are pretty well in alignment and what that represents is some really hard work by our city council and city leadership over the last several years primarily around cost containment and we'll talk a little bit more about that in a few minutes but it does not mean that this is a new problem it means we've been taking deliberate steps over the last several years to address this issue THIS FISCAL YEAR 26-27 WE INITIALLY FACED A $16 MILLION DEFICIT IN OUR GENERAL FUND AND WORKED HARD TO CLOSE THAT GAP THROUGH A VARIETY OF STRATEGIES AND THE GENERAL SERVICES FEE IS ONE OF THOSE STRATEGIES. YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE SCREEN THE GENERAL SERVICES FEE REVENUE THAT WILL COME IN IS THE BLUE DOTED LINE. And you can see that visual representation of it is just one of the strategies that we're using to close the general fund gap, but it will not solve the problem alone, but it is a key piece to preserve some critical services that we offer as a city. Next slide, please. I MENTIONED OUR EFFORTS AROUND COST CONTAINMENT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE HAD IN OUR FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY ACTION PLAN AN EXPENSE REDUCTION GOAL OF $9 MILLION. BETWEEN FISCAL YEAR 2022, 2023, AND FISCAL YEAR 27, WE HAVE ACTUALLY EXCEEDED THAT EXPENSE REDUCTION GOAL AND REDUCED EXPENSES BY $11 MILLION. That does have impacts to services that we offer. We've reduced eight police officer positions and four police professional staff positions, and that's had impacts, including reducing our proactive police bike team, eliminating mental health dedicated response resource, reducing our dedicated DUII enforcement, COORDINATION, ELIMINATING PHOTO RADAR VANS, AND THEN IMPACTS TO OTHER SERVICES, INCLUDING REDUCTION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION GRANTS, REDUCED LIBRARY CHILD CARE OUTREACH, AND CUTTING OUR LIBRARY DAYS AT MAURICE SCHOLZ. I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ALSO OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS SEEN SIGNIFICANT REDUCTIONS. THEY'VE REDUCED APPROXIMATELY 17 POSITIONS IN THAT DEPARTMENT, LARGELY IMPACTING THEIR SPEED AT WHICH THEY CAN TACKLE THINGS AND THEIR CAPACITY. THINGS FROM TRANSPORTATION PLANNING TO PROACTIVE CODE COMPLIANCE, TREE CODE WORK AND TRANSPORTATION ISSUES. and i say all that not to be negative but just to be realistic about these have been very difficult choices that we've made over the last couple years but city council has really been diligent and thoughtful about wanting to make sure we explore what expense reductions are possible before we turn to potential revenue generation And I do want to say that we're not done with the expense reduction conversation. And so as you know, if you watch our city council meetings regularly, we are returning to city council in a work session this fall with an additional budget reduction package of up to $2.5 million to reduce our reliance on one-time funding. So we are continuing to work through what additional potential expense reductions can be done without significantly impacting the services that we offer to the community. Next slide, please. So the fee, next slide please, the fee supports a number of our general services that we offer through the general fund. We are not adding new programs through this fee. We are not adding new staff. This is, as you saw on the previous slide that shows our general fund forecast, it does not solve our deficit issues, but what it does is really preserve some of the really critical and foundational services that we offer here as a city that make Beaverton the community that it is today. And that includes things from police response to neighborhood associations, volunteer engagement, graffiti removal, affordable housing support, access to technology and story times in the maker space at our library, and then our efforts to attracting new businesses. And so it's really about preserving those foundational services. Next slide, please. Moving on now to talk about the details of the fee. And so the fee that's being proposed is a monthly fee that would be collected on residents' utility bills. This is a common revenue tool that is used by other cities. Six out of the seven other similarly sized cities here in Oregon are in the similar boat as we are and have implemented either utility fees, local option levies, or both. YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE SCREEN THAT THOSE FEES RANGE ANYWHERE FROM $5 A MONTH TO $25.90 A MONTH. I WOULD NOTE THAT THOSE CITIES ON THE SCREEN THAT DO NOT HAVE FEES LISTED DO HAVE LOCAL OPTION LEVIES THAT THEY ARE USING AS REVENUE GENERATION TO SUPPORT SERVICES INSTEAD. Next slide, please. So the fee that is being proposed, and again, council evaluated a number of different options before directing staff to return with this option, is a flat fee that is set per equivalent dwelling unit or EDU. And this is a unit that reflects the typical service demand of a single family household. THIS WOULD BE ASSESSED MONTHLY ON ALL CITY UTILITY ACCOUNTS. THE RATE PROPOSED IS $9.50 PER EDU PER MONTH, WITH AN ANNUAL ESCALATOR THAT IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE TYPICAL GENERAL FUND INCREASE, WHICH EQUATES TO ABOUT 76 CENTS PER MONTH INCREASE IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS. THE GENERAL FUND IMPACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 26-27, IF ADOPTED, THE FEE WOULD GO INTO EFFECT AUGUST 1ST, SO IT'S SLIGHTLY LESS THAN A FULL YEAR OF REVENUE. WE HAVE BUDGETED FOR $5.3 MILLION IN THE GENERAL FUND AS A RESULT OF THIS NEW FEE IN FISCAL YEAR 26-27. FOR THOSE THAT MIGHT NOT KNOW, THE CITY DOES OFFER A BILL OF ASSISTANCE FOR OUR UTILITY BILLS AS THIS IS A FEE THAT WOULD BE PLACED ON THE UTILITY BILLS. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT CAN, IF RESIDENTS ARE STRUGGLING TO PAY UTILITY BILLS, THEY ARE QUALIFIED TO SEEK ASSISTANCE FOR THIS FEE. QUALIFIED RESIDENTS RECEIVE ASSISTANCE UP TO THREE TIMES IN A 12-MONTH PERIOD THROUGH OUR EXISTING PROGRAM IN PARTNERSHIP WITH COMMUNITY ACTION. And then you can see here on the screen the median number of EDUs that exist for each customer class to just give you an example of the impact of the fee on different types of customer classes. Next slide, please. SO STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL MOVES TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE ADDING BE WRITTEN CODE TO CREATE A GENERAL SERVICES FEE AND THE RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF THE FEE. THERE ARE ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER. COUNCIL CAN CONSIDER DELAYING THE FEE ADOPTION. I would reinforce the comment that we did budget for this fee in the fiscal year 26, 27 budget. One month delay would be a negative impact of approximately $485,000 per month. So if that is what council would like to do, staff would return with a supplemental budget proposal that would include expense reductions equal to the number of months of delay for council consideration. COUNCIL COULD ALSO DECLINE TO ADOPT THE FEE. THIS WOULD MEAN A LOSS OF $5.3 MILLION IN REVENUE TO THE FISCAL YEAR 26-27 BUDGET. SO STAFF WOULD NEED TO RETURN WITH A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET PROPOSAL THAT WOULD CONTAIN THOSE REDUCTIONS. THIS WOULD LIKELY MEAN A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN STAFF ANYWHERE BETWEEN 22 TO 40, DEPENDING ON HOW THE STAFF ARE FUNDED THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND. So that concludes my presentation, and with that, happy to answer any questions that you might have.

Questions? OK. SEEING NONE, AS A REMINDER, IF YOU'VE JUST DROPPED INTO THIS MEETING, WE HAVE HAD MANY, MANY, MANY WORK SESSIONS ON THIS. WE HAVE A LANDING PAGE ON THE CITY WEBSITE WHERE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY. THE CITY MANAGER, OF COURSE, HAS GONE THROUGH A BIT OF THAT WORK OF HOW WE GOT HERE TODAY. AND SO IF THERE'S NOT A LOT OF QUESTIONS, WHICH I DO SEE ONE IN THE CHAT, JUST LIKE THERE ARE MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO GO BACK AND WATCH PAST COUNCIL MEETINGS ON THIS TOPIC. COUNCILOR HASSAN.

yeah uh okay i wanted to just ask a few questions on the short-term action slide if that wants to get pulled up if not that's fine um the first question i have is about the local option levy if we were to pass this fee are we still anticipating the need for the local option levy

That's a great question. That is correct. So take the fiscal year 26-27 general fund deficit that we started with as a good example. So that deficit that we started with was $16 million. The full year of the general services fee revenue will bring in $6 million. Council last fall had been talking about a local option levy of approximately $6 million. So that fills in $12 million of the general fund deficit. And that's another reason that continued expense reductions are still on the table. because that does not fully close our deficit. And so we still need to work through some additional strategies like transient lodging tax increase, looking at our healthcare design and plan, and then continued expense reductions.

For the transient lodging tax increase, I mean, so it sounds like we need a multiple of these things in addition to the general services fee. From a timing perspective, when are we looking at the transient lodging tax increase?

Staff hopes to return to council early this fall with a work session to begin those discussions with the goal of having that in effect January 1st.

Can you expand on the public services fee?

So that is a typo on the slide. I apologize. Copied from an earlier version. That is the general services fee.

Okay. And then the street maintenance fee is the fee that we're talking about after this. That's correct. Okay and then the other question I know I've asked this probably less more in our one-on-ones but I'd like to try to ask more publicly and just I know we've been down this path and I know we've been asking these questions I am still struggling a lot affordability is the number one thing that we're hearing from people this feels like a big big thing to do today, and so I just want to make sure I ask some of these questions. Because of our special districts and our relationships with special districts, like maybe not today, but in the future, is there relationships for us to have shared costs or shared resources? And like what would that vision look like? Is that something we would need to lead? Is that something we would lead together? And just to give you an example, like HR shared services or fleet shared services, like how can we maybe make something like that happen?

So currently, as part of the fall budget reduction exercise, we are planning on having some conversations with some of our partners, THPRD specifically, just to evaluate are there any duplicate services that we're providing in terms of things that they do and ways that we could partner to explore just ways that we could trim the costs of some of the services that we offer. Currently right now, I would say that evaluation of shared administrative services like HR, IT, et cetera, would be something that would need to go more in the long-term bucket. And so I categorize long-term ones actions as things that they're not 100% within the city control, right? We're dependent upon our partners. I think that there's merit in having that discussion, but just my professional opinion, I think that would be challenging given the size of the city, as well as the complexity of kind of our labor structure and our classification structure and our pay structure as compared to some of our partners. So I'm not saying it's not worth the discussion, but I do think it's definitely a longer term, fairly complex endeavor to undergo.

Would you say like fleet sharing, like is that something that's a little bit more realistic or reasonable or what would that look like and have you seen that in other places?

Yeah, my understanding is that we have looked at potentially like shared facility space and is not something that has penciled out. But again, that is something that we could potentially look at. But a large portion of our fleet really are police cars and other vehicles. And so that's a very specialized need, right? And it's a very small portion of our fleet that are kind of your regular day-to-day vehicles.

okay and then last question i know right now the resolution is written with the increase what if we didn't do an increase every year and just did it as is to try to ease some of the burden on our community members i think that without some sort of annual escalator then we run into the same structural issue that we're facing with property taxes right now right where

The fee will help us now to date, but what happens three or four or five years from now when costs continue to escalate at a rate and the fee is not keeping pace. And so other cities that have not attached an escalator to them have then faced themselves having to do large jumps in the fee which becomes I think more difficult for residents versus something that is more gradual like 76 cents per month but other cities have done things like had to double the fee which is more disruptive and potentially for residents so there's kind of pros and cons to each approach okay thank you council president

THANK YOU. ELIZABETH, BEFORE THIS FISCAL YEAR, I KNOW WE JUST ELIMINATED OUR BUDGET APPROXIMATELY TEN FTEs. IS THAT CORRECT FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR THAT WE JUST PASSED?

FOR FISCAL YEAR 26-27, YES, TEN FTEs TOTAL.

WHAT WAS THE CUMULATIVE BEFORE THAT, 30-SOMETHING?

CORRECT. ALL TOLD OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, IT'S 40-PLUS POSITIONS.

And if we come back in the fall with another $2.5 million cuts, I'm guessing somewhere around 12 to 13, 15 FTEs. Yeah.

I know it's complicated. Yeah, we're still collecting that data.

Yeah. But approximately, right? So when I'm looking at that, if that holds steady, that would be 55 people that we've cut. And I think that's important for the public to hear because We are to the marrow now. You can't do that much more. I'm struggling a little bit like Councillor Huston with this, but I'm also struggling, I think for me the most of it is that escalator. And let me explain why. I don't mind the idea of an escalator. I feel like if we set it at 8%, we're just saying, okay, like that's the reality. Instead of us setting it at like 3% or tying it to inflation and having us work really hard on cost containment because we know. Because if we just automatically say you're gonna get 8%, LET'S BE HONEST, THIS IS GOVERNMENT, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND 8%. THAT'S THE WAY THIS WORKS. I UNDERSTAND IT. I THINK WE'VE BEEN ACTUALLY VERY FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO HEAR THAT I THINK DIFFERENTLY ABOUT THIS GOVERNMENT. BUT I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT WITH THAT. IF I WERE DESIGNING MYSELF, I WOULD DESIGN IT AT 3%, THE ESCALATOR, JUST TO GIVE US, AND KNOWING YOU COULD COME BACK TO US AND WE COULD MAKE THAT ONE-TIME DECISION EVERY SINGLE YEAR TO RAISE THAT ESCALATOR IF WE NEEDED, BUT I'M RELUCTANTLY GOING TO SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE IT IS, WE HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM. WE ARE LARGELY A RESIDENTIAL CITY. YOU KNOW, THIS ISN'T We don't have the problems of some of our neighboring cities that have the giant industrial complexes that cost next to nothing and generate millions of dollars. So I hate this, but I think we have to do it. That's it.

Okay. Do we have anyone from the public here to testify?

Nope.

Okay. I will now close the public hearing. We are ready for a vote. One more time? Well, we have to have a vote and then, like, we have to have a motion.

Yeah. Are you here to, are you in to make a motion?

Okay, thank you.

I move that the council adopt an ordinance amending Beaverton Code Chapter 2.09 and creating a general services fee and a resolution establishing the amount of the general services fee.

IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED AND WE WILL DO SOME DISCUSSION. I'M GOING TO OPEN TONIGHT AND SAY THAT I THINK EVERYONE IS STRUGGLING WITH THIS FEE. THIS ISN'T LIKE SOME EASY ONLY ONE OR TWO OF THE CITY COUNCILORS ARE STRUGGLING TO RAISE THIS FEE. IT IS THE REALITY OF WHERE WE ARE. It is an antiquated property tax system that only grows 3% a year. It is a no sales tax state. There's very little areas for cities to be creative. We can't create revenue out of nothing. We have looked at business license fees. We have looked at every area. We're gonna likely raise transient lodging tax, which is a fee you pay when you visit a city and stay in a hotel. So it's not a fee that's passed on to residents. And that has very limited uses. We can't have a transient lodging fee and just plug a hole in the general fund. It has to have very specific uses around tourism. And so we are gonna raise that. That's how we funded and paid for the Patricia Research Center for the Arts. That is not any money out of our general fund to do it. We use transient lodging fee. AND I AND GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AND OTHERS FOUGHT FOR A CHANGE THIS YEAR TO HAVE THE ALLOCATION CHANGE A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE CITY'S FAVOR SO WE'RE ABLE TO USE IT ON A COUPLE MORE THINGS THAT WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO USE IT FOR. THIS IS MY 14TH BUDGET AT THE CITY. AND I WOULD SAY WHEN I WAS A Budgets around here were relatively easy. Easy in the fact that we were not in a structural decline. We had more bandwidth. We are also at our constitutional cap that we can raise property taxes at. So not only does the state only allow us to grow 3% a year, they set a cap in which taxes can be raised to. And I always ask residents, what happened to your own expenses last year? Did they go up more than 3%? What does your own health care look like? What does your copays look like? What does your grocery bill look like? I deeply understand, as somebody that went to the grocery store today and filled up the car and is married to a military officer, what fees have done to our bottom line. This is no easy choice for us. Every major city in Oregon is in a structural decline besides one that has all the industrial land, and that is the city next to us. We have no industrial land in Beaverton. The way that we collect property taxes on residents is not equal to what we can collect in industrial land. I chose Beaverton because I didn't want to live next to a data center. I didn't want to live next to Intel. I wanted to live in a community, a place where I could raise my children. We have some long-term work to do. around property taxes. The mayors talk about it every single week in our weekly meetings. We talk to the governor about it constantly. We talk to the legislature about it constantly, but we have an inverse system in which cities create the economic revenue and personal taxes that go to the state. The state is not dependent on property taxes, so they are not inclined to help us fix this very political issue. We have cut A LOT OF POSITIONS IN THE CITY. WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT BECAUSE WE WANTED TO, IT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE TO. THIS FEE IS A MUST-DO TO PROTECT THE CITY'S EMPLOYEES TO BE ABLE TO DO CITY SERVICES. SURE, WE'RE GOING TO ASK FOR 2.5 MILLION MORE OF CUTS. BUT THAT IS NOT, WE ARE AN EMPLOYEE-BASED ORGANIZATION. 2.5 MILLION MEANS EMPLOYEES FROM THIS CITY. I PROMISE YOU, THIS IS NOT LIKE HOW WE TALKED ABOUT GOVERNMENT IN THE 80s WHERE THERE'S MILLIONS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF PORK BARREL FUNDING THAT WE COULD GO IN AND GET. WE HAVE BEEN DOING THE HARD WORK FOR YEARS. WE HAVE ELIMINATED POSITIONS FOR YEARS. THIS IS A MUST DO. WE ARE ONE OF THE LAST CITIES TO ADD A FEE. THAT SAYS A LOT ABOUT OUR FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY. IT SAYS A LOT ABOUT OUR WILLINGNESS TO DO HARD THINGS. SO TONIGHT I PLAN TO VOTE YES, BUT IT'S NOT AN EASY CHOICE BY ANY MEANS. WE HAVE BEEN HAVING THIS DISCUSSION ALL YEAR. AND THIS ISN'T THE END OF THE HARD DECISIONS. THIS GETS US A COUPLE MORE FEET FORWARD TO MAINTAIN OUR CORE CITY SERVICES. Councillor Hartmayer, Prigg.

Thank you, Mayor. As counselors and as a body, we have that financial and fiduciary responsibility to the fiscal health of our city. And we also have a responsibility to create a city budget that's balanced right. We can't go into debt. We don't have the ability based on our state law. My personal approach to governance, and I think that I've seen this from all my fellow counselors too, is we're trying to do the most good for the most people with limited resources. like as our duty to ensure that financial and fiscal health as a city, we've been making cuts year after year. I mean, this is like a strategic plan that we've had around our financial health. And every year we've made reductions, we've tried new techniques. and I also know that this council is committed to continuing the work and to continue to find reductions. Part of our budget commitment last month was to bring even more reductions forward. I agree with the mayor. We're at really a last resort. I think we did everything we could to reduce or to delay and to minimize any sort of revenue increases that would affect our people. We will continue to talk about it as a council and what we can do as a city and we'll also, I think, I would expect we will put this as number one priority or very high up on our legislative priority as well, right, is to get after that revenue reform. So I'm at the point where I know it's hard. I know I feel it. I know we all feel it. I know our residents will feel this. And we were elected to do the hard thing and to fulfill our responsibility as counselors to take care of that financial health of the city and make sure that we can continue to have a city that is safe and run smoothly. We see the effects of our budget challenges. We all know our roads are not in the space that we want them to be and that will lead to the next conversation. I am voting yes for this tonight because it's our responsibility and I think it's something we have to do and I don't even think I'm reluctant to do it because I think we've done everything we can to get to this place. It is extremely hard and it's our responsibility to do so.

Councilor Titor.

I'm going to be voting to support this and Like you all have already said, it is with a heaviness and a weight to it because so much of our community is struggling with affordability these days. I just want to put into context a little bit the potential elimination of 22 to 40 FTEs If we do not approve this general services fee, I think we talked some about the impact on the people working these jobs that that would have, but it's also the impact on the services that the community receives. The mayor mentioned that we are a people-based organization. When we talk about positions, we're also talking about the services and the work of the city itself and the benefits that our residents and businesses receive. We did quite extensive research and report and look into the services that our city offers, and we looked at what's actually discretionary versus non-discretionary, and by that I mean what does the state or federal government or other local governments, what do they all require of us, either legally or with intergovernmental agreements, and the vast majority of our work is non-discretionary. That means we have to do it. And yet we don't have the flexibility to actually be able to fund that work. And so if we're looking at a potential elimination of 22 to 40 more FTEs, we're talking about every single potential discretionary position and discretionary piece of work would no longer continue in the city. And that would be devastating for so many people who need it here. I don't think we fully understand just how hurtful and how harmful people would feel as a result of those reductions. that said we are going to continue looking at reductions we're looking at another 2.5 million over the next year so the work will continue but we need to also be able to keep doing the work of the city and these are core services that these that this fee will help fund and very difficult but it is very it is essential counselor tip nod

Sorry, I was unmuting my laptop, which is not the right button. If anything fit the definition of quagmire, I think it's this. I agree with everything that's been said so far. I also agree with you, Councillor Hartmeyer-Prigg, that I don't feel conflicted about voting yes for this tonight, but I can still feel really bad about it. I had a conversation with a resident over the weekend, an older fellow who's on a fixed income who was on the verge of tears and very frustrated because he didn't understand how it is that a city that looks as beautiful as Beaverton does, that is such a wonderful place to live, to call home, to work in, to visit, could be short on cash. And the slide of the dollar split up. A lot of people do not know that we don't receive all of the property taxes. And I think they feel the crush so hard against all of those different categories that were mentioned from the gas station to the grocery store to the bills to medical costs to medical insurance and dental and on and on and on. We have the exact same costs as the city, including the lights that are on today and the IT and the retirement and insurance for staff and just the materials increases. It's just absolutely deflating when we've worked so hard over so many years to look at ways to tighten the belt, to do the thing that we're hearing from people who are writing in ANGRILY SAYING YOU HAVE ENOUGH MONEY. I KEEP SEEING THAT. SOME OF THE FEEDBACK WE ARE GETTING, YOU DON'T NEED ANY MORE OF OUR MONEY. YOU HAVE ENOUGH MONEY. THIS GOES TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, WE NEED TO LEARN TO COMMUNICATE BETTER. IT IS SO COMPLICATED AND THERE IS SO MUCH TO SAY IN THE RESPONSE OF NO, WE REALLY DON'T. I also, as hard as those future conversations are going to be around where else are we cutting, they're conversations that we all are here for. And the staff have been so diligent at staying the course and figuring this out. I have a lot of faith in this team to figure it out. And hopefully, we can be a part of a loud and, I don't know, shouting voice to the legislature to fix this at the state level, since every single city other than one seems to be having the same issues that we are.

Councilor Kimmie.

I would love to vote no on this, but I just can't. I looked at every other If this was a business, the first thing I would do is try to find an increase in revenue. Find a way to bring in more customers. Sell more products. But it's the government. We can't do that. Our only source of revenue is the property taxes that we get. And it's capped. So money is... we know exactly how much we're going to get and we know how much we have to pay out so so that's why the reductions have to come in and the fee has to increase uh and that's the only way we could try to balance it which is difficult I hate the fact that this is the first of the fees that we're implementing and there are more coming For a while, and we mentioned about 2.5. The reality is it could be more. So I'm going into it. Yes, I'm going to vote yes on it, but I'm going into it fully realizing what needs to be done. I'm willing to do the work. But I think we are the team who can do it. We've been here for a few years together. We know what's going on. And I think we cannot pass it on to the next person, whoever that's going to be. We're the ones who have to correct the ship and then move it forward. And so when we are done, we can hand it over to the people who can build better, thrive. So we have a hard thing to do, but I'm willing to. Do it with all of you, and yeah, thanks to staff. It's a difficult conversation. Hopefully, within a year or two, we don't have to talk about this anymore. Thank you.

Council President. Mayor, in the consent agenda, we passed certification of the election. And the only reason that's germane to my comments is because I had to run for reelection this year. And I talked to several thousand people over the course of that campaign. And yes, affordability did come up a lot. But surprisingly, quality of life consistently came up. Keep Beaverton high in its quality of life. We want to keep that over and over. Beaverton is a lot more expensive than it was to keep it that quality of life. In my friend group a couple years ago, an article in the New York Times was passed around very widely. It featured Portland and it featured a 911 call and it took 45 minutes for a response. I happened to call emergency services here in Beaverton in the winter. I can't remember if it was January or February. There was a person in crisis. Within three minutes, the police were there. So what is value? To me, that's a three-minute 911 call. That person got the help they needed. I don't want to pay any more per month. It's hard enough for everyone, but it does sit deep within my soul that we need to keep the quality of life high in Beaverton. It's not just about the cost. It's about the value you get for that dollar, and we have to keep it. We have to keep driving costs down. That is part of our job. That is a part of the staff's job. We will continue to do that. We have to keep the focus, though, on value. This dollar buys. And these $9 a month buy. And I hope no one ever has to call 911. I hope you never have to interact with emergency services. But if you do, I want you to know they'll be there. And every time I have to pay that $9, I'm going to think about that call. I'm going to think about how quickly and professionally every interaction I have with our emergency services, every time I take my niece to the library, And she has 20 books in her bag to check out. We can focus on the cost or we can focus on the value. I'm going to choose to focus on the value because I believe the voters when they tell me to keep the quality of life high. And I wish it were free. I wish I could do that for free. I think we all do. But I think $9 a month is worth it to live here in Beaverton. So I'll be voting yes. Councilor Hassid.

Yeah, I want to take a moment and acknowledge staff and staff work. Obviously the impacts to staff for the last few years have been really dire in terms of figuring out how to manage this budget. I think all I've heard since I've started is dealing with the budget and navigating the budget. I think we're all struggling because this feels like a, obviously it's a very hard decision. It's putting more on our constituents. It's putting more on our community. I'm not sure I feel like I've done enough to examine some of the budget and feel like I know enough. And so I sit with that. And so I sit with that because I still have a lot more questions. I still have a lot more things that I think that we could do. And it does not... BODE WELL IN THE BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING LAST MONTH THAT WE CUT AN EQUITY OFFICER POSITION SO I JUST I'M NOT SURE I FEEL LIKE I HAVE DONE ENOUGH AND SO I'M GOING TO VOTE NO TONIGHT.

OKAY. SINCE BECOMING MAYOR, THERE'S NOT BEEN A DAY THAT'S GONE BY WHERE I'VE NOT TALKED ABOUT HOMELESSNESS, REVENUE. THERE'S NOT A DAY THAT'S GONE BY THAT I HAVE SAT IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, INCLUDING YESTERDAY, WITH 27 IDEAS ON THE BUDGET. I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE QUESTIONS FROM THE BUDGET COMMITTEE, WE HAVE PRODUCED THOUSANDS OF QUESTIONS. WE'VE ASKED HARD THINGS. THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD CUT, IF WE DO NOT PASS THIS, 22 STAFF FROM THIS BUILDING. AND SO MAKING THE HARD CHOICE OF VOTING YES TO PROTECT OUR STAFF, TO PROTECT SERVICES FOR OUR COMMUNITY IS WHAT YOU ARE WITNESSING TONIGHT. SO WITH THAT, WILL THE RECORDER CALL THE ROLL?

SIR, ORDINANCE 4881 AND RESOLUTION 4965. COUNSELOR DUGGER?

YES.

Councillor Hart, Mayor Prigg? Yes. Councillor Hassan?

No.

Councillor Kimme?

Yes.

Councillor Teeter? Yes. Councillor Tivnon? Yes. Mayor Beatty?

Yes.

Six yes, one no. Motion carries.

The next item on the agenda is a public hearing on ordinance number 4882, an ordinance adding Beaverton code chapter 3.05 and creating a straight maintenance fee and a resolution establishing the rates of the city. Maintainance fees, anyone wishing to speak at this hearing should follow the instructions included in tonight's agenda. For those attending in person, yellow visitor card at the back of the table, hand it to the city recorder at the end of the dais on my right. If you are a member of the public and wish to speak, you have three minutes. When you speak, give your name, city for the record, and council members may ask questions of presenters, the attorney, or staff if it will help the council make a decision. We will start tonight with a staff presentation.

All right. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Elizabeth Coffey, Interim City Manager, joined again by Assistant Finance Director Susan Cole. And for this one, joined by our Public Works Director Tim Elsie. And we're here to talk about the street maintenance fee. Next slide, please. Similar to the general services fee, council has discussed this potential fee at length over the last several months, so we'll keep our presentation fairly brief. We'll talk a little bit about why a street maintenance fee, what the fee supports, fee details, and then next steps. Next slide, please. So the council action tonight is to hold a public hearing and consider the ordinance amending the code and a resolution establishing the rates for the potential fee. Next slide, please. So why a street maintenance fee? Next slide, please. So I'm going to zoom out a little bit just in case there's members of the public here tonight or online that have not tuned into the previous conversations we've had around the fee. And the city's budget consists of many, many different funds. And think of those funds like buckets in which you can put certain types of revenue and certain types of expenses. So the general services fee that we just discussed is related to our general fund, which is where police, planning, economic development, et cetera, those types of services are housed. But we also have a fund that's called the street fund. And that is the fund that really houses all things related to, you guessed it, our streets and transportation. And as you can see from the slide, the city street fund is primarily supported by state gas taxes. And the street fund is one of the funds that is included in the city's fiscal sustainability action plan. as an area that we need to pay attention to and come up with solutions for because the state gas tax revenue has plateaued due to more fuel efficient vehicles and a rise in electric vehicle use. And then the expenses for maintaining our transportation infrastructure have continued to grow. For example, highway construction costs have increased by 70% from late 2020 to mid 2024, mainly because of higher material prices like asphalt and concrete, rising labor costs and persistent supply chain issues. So this fund is one that needs attention. because we can no longer support the necessary basic transportation and roadway maintenance needs that we have, and that's resulted in zero arterial or major collector overlays for over eight years. In the last four years, even minor overlays have only been done alongside other capital or utility projects rather than through a dedicated pavement maintenance plan, which would be the best practice. Next slide, please. So this graph shows you kind of the life cycle of a street. And on the left side of the graph, you can see in the green, that's a street with excellent condition. And then you can see it kind of goes towards the middle where there's that yellowish line. And that is a street that's in fair condition. And most of the city streets are here and they have pavement condition index, which we'll talk about in a minute, between 65 and 74, depending on the type of the street. And you can kind of see at the top of the graph that the deterioration of the streets is just starting to be visible. And what's interesting, I guess, if you're a local government nerd like me, is that if you get down to the end of the life of the street in the very poor condition, you can see those cracks start to go all the way down to what you might think of as the foundation of the street. And what that means is that if we don't take care of those cracks that start showing up when the street is in fair condition, by the time it gets down to the very poor position, very poor condition, that's a street that has to be actually reconstructed. So ground down to the bottom and then totally rebuilt. And that is significantly more expensive than dealing with the streets kind of in the middle of the graph. Next slide, please. So $1 in maintenance will save us $6 to $10 later on. And so you can see that here in this graph. And so I mentioned pavement condition index, or PCI. That's a numerical rating system that ranges from 0 to 100 that the industry uses to indicate the overall health and structural integrity of the roadway. And so you can see here, Beaverton streets are kind of in that fair condition. And if we spend just a dollar on preservation in kind of the top arc where streets are anywhere from excellent to fair, then we can eliminate having to spend six to $10 on rehabilitation for reconstruction when you start to get into that rapid decrease in quality. And so that means that even though it is becoming more and more expensive to maintain the streets, it is still less expensive than having to completely rebuild them. Next slide, please. So what would a street maintenance fee support? Next slide, please. The Beaverton code that we're proposing is written broadly to preserve future flexibility and street maintenance means repair, operation, preservation, safety enhancements, and capital. And what's qualified in that are city streets, pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, and then facilities for other modes of travel. So we are writing the code broadly to allow future councils that flexibility if needed or if things change down the road. but our plans specifically for the next five years of a potential street maintenance fee are to focus specifically on the streets that's what the funding of this fee would provide for we do have a backlog of streets that need maintenance in year one we would plan on focusing on slurry seal increase lane width grinding and inlays after year one we would continue the slurry sale program we would start to incorporate full with grind and inlays and overlays on critical streets and then start to really reduce that backlog and so we would able to bring up that citywide average pci goal to 70 so really keeping those streets in good condition You can see here a map on the screen. It's a little bit hard to see at this scale of kind of where we plan to tackle the streets. And I would note that at the last council work session on this fee, we talked about our outreach plan. We are ready to go and launch that on August 1st. We have lots of videos in the queue that kind of talk a little bit about um what we do to maintain our streets and what we're doing and we will plan on having some more interactive ways that people can see exactly where we're going to be working through the city as we tackle the maintenance backlog next slide please um so going over fee details next slide please um so like the general services fee this would also be a fee on the utility bill that would be assessed monthly to utility customers As you can see here on the screen, again, many other cities similar boat as us are also using this as a tool to help with street maintenance and their fees range anywhere from $9.11 to $18.53 a month. Next slide, please. So some details about the proposed fee. And so the fee is set up generally when you are looking at street maintenance, you look at trip generation per customer class as the basis for the rates. And so what we've done for this fee is convert trip generation into equivalent dwelling units or EDUs to calculate this fee. And that ensures consistency in how the city's fees are collected via the utility bill. As a reminder, EDU is a standard unit of measurement that represents the average service demand for a single family residential household. um the rates are set per customer class and this fee is a little bit different we are starting with kind of a backlog in our street maintenance and in our street fund we have a significant backlog to get through and but we do want to be cognizant of the impact to our residents of this potential fee and so what we've proposed to do is phase in this fee gradually over three years And so the fee starts out $5 for single-family customers. And then in years two and three, there would be a $5 increase for single-family residential customers. And then starting in year four, we would increase it via a standard industry annual escalator that's typically used for these types of construction. The impact to the street fund, if passed, would be 3.3 million in fiscal year 26-27. And then again, this is a fee on our utility bill, and so qualified residents are eligible to receive assistance up to three times in a 12-month period. Next slide, please. So this just gives you a visual of the fee. You can see here on the left, the various customer classes that we have. And then the second column shows you the rate per EDU. So again, that's set per customer class based on the trip generation. You can see here the year one example, and then how that phases in over the three-year total of the fee. um and then next slide please um so next steps um so you can see here the staff recommendation here on the screen alternative actions one council can delay the fee adoption we do not have revenue budgeted in the fiscal year 26-27 for the street maintenance fee A one month delay of the fee, which we anticipate the fee going into effect August 1st. If there is a one month delay, each month delay is equivalent to $300,000 loss below that $3.3 million revenue target. And so what staff would do is just reassess what maintenance would be possible in year one of the fee, depending on what that delay might be. Council can also decline to adopt the fee. There would be no street maintenance in the fiscal year 26-27 budget, because there would not be funding for that. Absent any additional action in the future, over time conditions will deteriorate, leading to full street reconstructions with no revenue source. With that, that concludes my presentation and staff are happy to answer any questions that you might have.

Thank you.

OK, Councilor Husson.

Yeah, thank you. You already said this at the presentation, but I just want to reiterate this question if that's okay. So one of the things I heard from folks that were commenting about this was like, I don't drive and I live in the city and you're hitting me with a fee. Can you elaborate on how expansive this fee is in terms of covering different costs across the city?

Yeah, so the fee is written broadly into the code to allow flexibility. So, you know, it can be used on other facets of the transportation network. Our plan right now, because of the backlog of needs in our street network, is to focus on the streets. The fee itself is not sufficient to cover kind of other modes of transportation. But the streets really are the foundation of our transportation network just because it's not just single family passengers or passenger vehicles. It's also what our emergency response vehicles use when they travel. It's also what delivery drivers use, businesses, et cetera. And so that's really why we're focusing first and foremost on the streets. Thank you.

Council President. Probably a question for Tim. Tim, what's driving the deterioration of the streets? Because from what I've read in other places, it's vehicle weight. Is that accurate or? It's vehicle weight. And the weather cycles, too. You bet. It's vehicle weight.

It's weather cycles. It's age. Yes, it's all of those. The pavement has a weathering cycle. And as soon as you get the cracks into the sub-base material, then that has been breached. and then the water goes in, and when you have freeze-thaw, it really deteriorates the streets. But yes, the easels, or equivalent single axle loads, is a very common way that people will determine how long the street will last based on the amount of traffic that's on that road.

And have you seen any model in other cities, probably within Oregon, but certainly elsewhere, where they account for, like, the weight of, and I'm thinking the big tractor trailers, right? Like, I read once that, like, for every one of those, and I know we all benefit from that, right, because we all get deliveries, but, like, that's the equivalent of, like, 1,000 cars driving on the same road. Yeah. HAVE YOU SEEN ANY OTHER CITIES WITH A REVENUE OPTION TO ACCOUNT FOR WEIGHT FOR THOSE BIG THINGS?

ONLY WHEN TRAILERS GO OVER THE LEGAL WEIGHT. SO FOR LEGAL WEIGHTS, I DON'T KNOW OF A WAY TO DO THAT. BUT YES, FOR ANY OVERSIZED OR OVERWEIGHT VEHICLES, THERE ARE PERMITS AND THERE ARE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. THAT'S A PRETTY NORMAL THING TO DO.

OKAY. AND CERTAINLY, THAT'S REALLY COMPLICATED.

ANYTHING. THE DESIGN OF THE STREET IS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE LEGAL WEIGHTS OF THE VEHICLES.

I THINK THAT'S IT. THANKS.

DO YOU HAVE HIGH PRIORITY STREETS ON YOUR MIND ONCE THIS GETS? DON'T GIVE ME 100 DIFFERENT STREETS, BUT WHAT'S YOUR NUMBER THREE? ONE, TWO, THREE.

We do. We have a five-year plan, and I'm happy to go through that, or I can just talk about the first streets. We already have Hall Boulevard from 217 to Ridgecrest designed. That has been a project that's been in the queue for actually several years. We were trying to save up money to do that a few years back, but our expenses overtook that. The money that we were saving for that. We've got a current estimate for that. That's 3300 feet of street. Our current estimate is $2.25 million for 3300 feet. Just for scale that figures out to $3.6 million per mile on a street that large for the grind and inlay for that. We also have center from Hall to 117th. That is a street that's in terrible shape. 170th from Baseline to Whitley. The next year we're looking at Allen Boulevard from Murray to Hall and from 217 to Western. The next year we're looking at Cedar Hills from Farmington to the city limits. And Greenway, Murray Boulevard to Hall Boulevard. And then 125th Greenway to Shoals Ferry.

Okay. Let's go down.

I'm sorry. I'm an engineer.

Yeah, of course. I was going to. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. That's enough.

I can bore you. I promise you that.

Yeah. Thanks for that. Sure. Because I want the public to know what they're getting and how desperately it's needed around that time. And we I want to give them certain expectations that want to pay for it is what you expect to get right And also I see that there's some flexibility with the street Maintenance fee that you could address also sidewalks and pedestrian walkways So that's the first thing people notice is the broken sidewalks. It's hard to walk and also of course potholes I gotta maintain those. Can you tell me just a little bit about that in 30 seconds? Okay A little bit about what, I'm sorry? Sidewalks, maintenance, potholes.

So I'm gonna go back a little bit and then I'll come back to sidewalks if you don't mind. So to ensure that we are utilizing the funds in the best way possible, we have used an outside consulting firm to come in and raid our streets three times since 2016. They have also provided us with some software so that we are able to plug in different scenarios with the funding that we receive for street maintenance. that scenario will then maximize the use of those funds. In other words, we're not just doing worse first, and certainly not trying a maintenance technique like a slurry seal on a street that needs a more robust maintenance technique on it. So it maximizes the PCI over five years while minimizing the backlog over that same five years. A backlog or the percentage of streets that we have that have a PCI of less than 40. So these streets are the streets that we are planning on rebuilding right now, paving and overlaying, grinding as we need to, along with the other maintenance techniques, utilizing the software that we received from the consultant. That's just really amazing software. We'll also take input on sidewalks that have to be repaired. We still do sidewalk repair today. We have people that are out there ensuring that You know people that are on sidewalks are vulnerable and we try to take care of the trips for the sidewalks that we are responsible for maintaining. Of course we do have streets on local streets where the public is responsible for those sidewalks.

Okay, just one quick one. I mentioned to Elizabeth before, but in downtown where we are investing heavily on recruiting businesses and restaurants, sidewalks were probably built when the city was built like 120-some years ago. MAYBE WE'LL DISCUSS FOR THE FUTURE. SIDEWALKS, THERE'S SOME SIDEWALKS IN OLD TOWN BEVERTON THAT NEEDS IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. I KNOW RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES ARE RESPONSIBLE ALSO, BUT MAYBE YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOME CREATIVE WAY TO MAKE THEM FIX THE SIDEWALKS. SO THAT'S ONE OF MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU.

I've got a few comments. One, the Councilor Kimme's comments there about the age of downtown sidewalks. Oh yes, okay, thank you. That's a good point. Okay, questions, not comments. Tim, can you talk a little bit about our rationale for going with the $5 approach for this year, increasing it to 10 and then 15. I know we've talked about Bend being the example, and I'm wondering if you can talk a little bit about that and their success and what they've seen as far as their implementation of that strategy.

you bet and thank you for mentioning that ben has been a great partner with us in this thought process as we've been through we went over actually took four people including myself over and they opened up their conference room they brought in their assistant city manager their street supervisor public works director attorneys finance people to help us understand the challenges that they had in not only just communicating this, but in developing the fee in a way that it works for their streets. They've also been able to pass general obligation bonds, and so they've tackled some of their street network and some other challenges with that. They decided go with this phased in approach, which is without a doubt where I got the idea. And they did $5, $10, and then they have currently postponed moving to the $15 fee. And a lot of that is because the general obligation bonds have brought their PCI of their street network up faster than they expected it to. And then also they had paused it last year because they were hoping the legislature would pass a gas tax that could help fill in some of that gap. WE UTILIZED IT AND THE REASON I DID IT IS NOT JUST $5 BECAUSE MEN DID $5. IT'S BECAUSE WHEN I PRESENTED TO THIS COUNCIL IN SEPTEMBER 16 OF LAST YEAR, I PRESENTED YOU WITH SEVERAL DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. SOME OF THOSE SCENARIOS, ONE was that over five years we would well let me let me stop real quick without any additional revenue in the next five years our the pci aggregate pci of our street network will be in the low 60s that gets you to the point where you have to start using those more aggressive maintenance techniques what i presented to council was different scenarios and one of the scenarios was to maintain the pci at about 70 over five years so with the phased in approach that we have the five dollars five dollars five dollars that puts us at the same 70 pci over five years using the aggressive maintenance techniques and then the the less aggressive maintenance techniques at the same time SO I BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE THAT I COULD SHOW COUNCIL THAT THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT.

DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TESTIFYING? SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING. WHAT'S THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL?

I'LL MOVE THAT THE COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE ADDING BEAVERTON CODE CHAPTER 3.05 AND CREATING A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE AND A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE RATES FOR THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE.

I'LL SECOND IT. SECONDED. TONIGHT THIS IS AGAIN JUST NOT AN EASY CHOICE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL. But I do want the public to understand that our roads are the city's number one capital asset. It is the thing that we spend very little time talking about, except for me. All 212 miles, Jocelyn and I have gone to Salem, including we went to Salem last Monday to talk to Republican members of the legislature about the gas tax and the city's needs and what we need to be able to do to fund these projects. When we used to do polling in the city years ago, the number one complaint from residents was always roads. And that was when roads were in pristine condition, 80% to 90% PSI. You can imagine how much people complain now about the quality of the roads, although you could visibly tell when you leave Beaverton and hit Portland. As a runner, I run on Greenway Trail quite a bit. I run all over the city. I ride my bike. Our roads have taken an extreme hit. Part of our fiscal sustainability and what we've done for the last couple of years is defer maintenance of the roads to help our budget maintenance stay the same. Councilor Duggar was the only member at the time who was actually a budget committee member, not a city councilor, when we made an active decision to pause street maintenance to be able to bring down city costs. There is a direct correlation between that action of pausing street maintenance and where we are right now. Just like your home, you have to do maintenance. You have to fix things. You can't just keep closing the door and hoping for something better. Tonight, this is about a decision about making sure that our number one capital asset that this city owns, all 212 miles, get the maintenance that they need. So I will be voting yes. Councillor Husson, I do want to say one thing. Bend is a little bit different of a city when they deal with their road is often dealt with with snow and the removal of snow causes their roads to go through quicker. So it's not quite an apples to apples comparison. It is in city size and how they do fees, but the roads and how we maintain them are vastly different. I hope, like them, we can pause this fee in the future as well. Councillor Husson.

Yes. Before I deliberate, I just want to share in a few minutes, I will get up to leave. Some of you know I have a red-eye flight to catch tonight, and I'm here because these were important decisions and I wanted to be here, and I will try to call in with a car full of people because I do want to deliberate on a few other items that we're discussing tonight. Usually summer meetings are lighter. It just didn't work out. I AM SUPPORTING THE STREET MAINTENANCE FEE. I HAVE FOLLOWED THE PCI CONVERSATION, WHICH IS A FANCY WORD FOR THE QUALITY OF OUR ROADS. I DO THINK THIS IS AN INVESTMENT THAT'S WORTH US PUTTING INTO IN THIS MOMENT. IT DOES STILL BREAK MY HEART WITH THE AFFORDABILITY AND WHAT WE SEE IS HAPPENING WITH AFFORDABILITY. WHAT I APPRECIATE ABOUT THIS FEE IS WE KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT'S GOING AND IT IS GOING TO BE PROTECTING OUR MAIN ASSET. I DO WANT TO CALL IN FOR THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

Thank you. This is an affordability issue for me, and I am supporting it for that reason. We saw in the graphic shared by our staff that $1 in maintenance is worth about $6 to $10 in road reconstruction costs, and that is what we would be facing if we do not approve this street maintenance fee. And so to put that in perspective, we're talking about a $5 per month fee at this point in time. And if we don't do that, then we'd be talking about a $50 per month fee that we would be having to charge in order to reconstruct our roads when they decay and fall apart to that point. And that is what would happen. avoid it by not making a decision tonight. I think we've got to make this decision for the sake of affordability of our residents in the future. Quality maintenance is a good governance strategy and it's just taking care of our city. That's what we've got to do. The state is working on a road usage fee, but I'm not counting on the state to come to our rescue because they often burden us more than we would like. The state gas tax revenues have not increased over the years, and we're not sure what the state's going to do with the future of the gas tax. So we need solutions here locally, and this is something that many other cities have had for 20 years, and we have not done because we've wanted to keep costs as low as possible for as long as possible. WE CAN'T DO THAT ANYMORE. WE ARE HERE. I THINK THIS IS A WORTHY INVESTMENT AND I THINK WE HAVE TO DO IT.

I WILL BE VOTING YES BUT I WILL REFERENCE PORTLAND AGAIN BECAUSE THAT IS A THEME TONIGHT. 2015 WE SOLD OUR HOUSE IN PORTLAND AND MOVED BACK TO BEAVERTON. I LOOKED IT UP. THEIR ROAD MAINTENANCE BACKLOG IN 2015 WAS $1.2 BILLION. LAST MONTH OR THE MONTH BEFORE PORTLAND PASSED A STREET MAINTENANCE FEE. IN THE LAST 10 YEARS THEIR BACKLOG IS NOW $7 BILLION. THIS IS WHAT WE ARE PREVENTING BY DOING THIS. I'M GOING TO SAY THIS IS THE AFFORDABLE OPTION BY FAR BY PASSING THIS. AGAIN, I WISH I HAD SOMEBODY I WISH WE HAD AN UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF MONEY, BUT THIS IS HOW WE REMAIN FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE HERE IN BEAVERTON, AS WE TAKE CARE OF THE STUFF THAT WE HAVE. PAINFUL, YES, BUT IT'S MUCH BETTER THAN COMING TO YOU, AS COUNCILOR TETER MENTIONED, IN TEN YEARS WITH A BILLION DOLLAR BACKLOG AND A $50 A MONTH CHARGE. SO I WILL BE VOTING YES FOR THIS, AND I ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME.

One is not difficult for me. I think I said that enthusiastically supporting this one. It's a generational investment. It's going to save future generations a lot of money with us doing this right now. So here for it. Thank you.

All right. Recorder, please call the roll.

Yes.

Yes.

Councilor Hassan? Yes. Councilor Kimme?

Yes.

Councilor Teeter? Yes. Councilor Tivdon? Yes. Mayor Beatty? Yes. Seven yes, zero no. Motion carries.

We can move this real quick. Do you want to stay for the vote? Let's do it. Okay, action item. Everyone, we've talked to death. Councilor Hassan has to get to a plane. I am dying, so let's do this vote. Agenda Bill 4967, Sanctuary City Ordinance Policy. What is the desire of the council?

I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 4967 TO APPROVE.

SECOND. MOVED BY COUNSELOR HUSSEN AND SECONDED BY COUNSELOR DUGGAR. WHAT IS THE DISCUSSION?

It's okay if you want to discuss. I have no problem calling in. I just want to share. Some of you might know this story. In 2004, a person that I really cared about was disappeared and taken by federal authorities and wrongfully prosecuted for a crime they did not commit. And so this is really personal, like deeply personal for me to see what's happening right now. It is a lot of trauma from 20 years ago. SO WHEN THIS STARTED IN OUR COUNTY AND WHEN PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY SAID WE'RE GOING TO DO MEGRA WATCH, WHICH IS THE PROGRAM TO BE ABLE TO GO OUT IN THE STREETS AND SHOW UP AND SHOW UP FOR COMMUNITY, IT WAS THE MOST TRAUMATIC AND MOST BEAUTIFUL THING TO WATCH PEOPLE JUST GET IN THEIR CAR AND BE LIKE, I'M GOING TO SHOW UP AND I'M GOING TO RECORD OR SEE IF I CAN STOP THIS FROM HAPPENING. And in January, we came together and said, okay, we want to try to do something about this. So what does that look like? And we came at a really great place as was possible. And tonight we are, I think, coming even farther. And so I want to start by thanking folks in Meagre Watch who every day choose to go out and protect our community members. We've had two people taken in the last month, which is heartbreaking. I want to thank city staff. I want to thank the council. I want to thank our police officers as well. I know that these were hard conversations to have. And you met us and you met the community where they are. And so I was tearing up earlier thinking about how far we've come. So it means so much to me to be here in this moment and vote yes on this. Thank you.

Council President. I just want to ask the City Manager, a couple of the commenters asked for the reporting to be public. Is that possible? And can we, I don't think we need to change the resolution, but can we?

Yeah, I think the resolution provides flexibility in how we do the reporting going forward.

Yeah, I think, yeah, I think I'm enthusiastically supporting this, but request that that be public and transparent as possible. Thank you.

Councilor Hart, Mayor Prigg.

I'm supporting this ordinance tonight. I think we've felt often that we couldn't do enough and this again is a step towards something we can do. As Councillor Haslam mentioned, I mean ICE activity seems to be increasing again. More people are being taken again. It's not like it was in the fall but it is still happening and these are community members. So the more that we can do to say we're here for you, we care for you. We know that our PD is here with the best interest of our community at heart. And this is just kind of a public like documentation of that to say that BPD is part of our community to like look out for community as well. So I'm grateful for this. I'm glad that we were codifying it and I'll be voting yes.

Councilor Teeter.

Be voting yes on this. I think one of the frustrations and pain points that I heard from people when I was talking with people in the community about this topic was just a lack of clarity about what our existing policies are and what our strategies are for when these situations arise. And there wasn't one single space where people would go to get that information. And I really appreciate how this resolution includes references to specific policies within Beaverton police policies and within our code that are applicable in times that can be really chaotic and confusing. So I think this is a really good step to pull it all together. And I'm excited to vote yes.

Councilor Kimme.

Yeah, definitely I'll be voting yes, but I just want to thank city manager's office, city attorney's office, and BPD for coming together to make this work. I see ICE vehicles more than before on Beaverton streets. It's always frustrating to witness what's going on, upsets you, but as a local elected NOT MUCH WE COULD DO ACTIVELY, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING MEANINGFUL, SOMETHING THAT WE CAN RELATE TO RESIDENTS OF WHAT WE COULD DO, WHAT THE EXPECTATION FROM OUR ELECTED AND OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT IS. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BRINGING THIS TOGETHER. COUNCILOR TIPNODE.

ECHOING WHAT OTHER COUNCILORS HAVE SAID, IT'S BEEN A LONG ROAD TO GET HERE. MAJOR THANKS TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND TO THE BEAVERTON POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR COMING TO THE TABLE AND GETTING THIS FIGURED OUT FOR US. Oh, and also to members of the community for showing up and sharing their voices and helping to push this along.

Thank you for the work on this, both the city attorney and the city manager. The city attorney and I meet frequently with lawyers for good governance. We have reached for outside resources to help the city navigate this incredibly challenging time. Local government is not designed to fight the central federal government. We're designed to work in tandem with them. This feels like it took a long time, but this is really quick in local government time to speed up to something like this. We had to take a pause and include all of our labor body of this conversation because this is about their day-to-day work, which they have the right to negotiate. WHAT THEIR DAY-TO-DAY WORK LOOKS LIKE. THIS DOCUMENT IS STRONGER BECAUSE OF BUY-IN FROM STAFF, BOTH FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND FROM OUR SEIU EMPLOYEES. THIS GIVES THEM A CLEAR GLIDING DOCUMENT ON HOW TO INTERACT WITH FEDERAL AGENTS THAT ARE IN OUR CITY. THIS IS NOT EASY WORK AND THIS IS NOT FINAL WORK, OF COURSE, THAT WE'RE DOING TONIGHT. I WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL WORK GROUP THAT WAS STOOD UP TO ADDRESS THIS AND THE CITY INTERIM CITY MANAGER THAT GOT TO WORK REALLY QUICKLY, NOT ONLY AS WE'RE DEALING WITH ISSUES OF THE CITY, BUT OUTSIDE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MAKING OUR LIFE HARDER. SO THIS IS A SMALL VICTORY FOR THE COMMUNITY TONIGHT. THE CITY COUNCIL IS PLEASED TO VOTE ON IT. WITH THAT, WILL THE CITY RECORDER PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?

This is for Resolution 4967. Councillor Duggar? Yes. Councillor Hartmeyer-Prigg?

Yes.

Councillor Husson? Yes. Thank you. Councillor Kimme?

Yes.

Councillor Teeter? Yes. Councillor Tipton? Yes. Mayor Beatty.

Yes.

Seven yes, zero no. Motion carries.

Okay. In everyone's best interest, I'm going to give us a recess until 830. And upon coming back, the council president will officiate the rest of the meeting. Thank you.

Time to come back. Let's get this show on the road. I'M GOING TO CALL US BACK INTO ORDER. I'M GOING TO BANG THAT LITTLE THING. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS A FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE. NEXT UP WE HAVE A FIRST READING ORDINANCE REGARDING ORDINANCE 4883 AND ORDINANCE AMENDING BEAVERTON CODE SECTIONS 6.02.030 AND SECTION 6.02.390 RELATING TO PARKING PERMIT FEES. parking eligibility criteria and grounds for misusing a parking permit. On August 18, 2026, during a regularly scheduled city council meeting, a public hearing will be held regarding an ordinance amending Beaverton Code section 6.02.030 and section 6.02.390 relating to parking permit areas, parking eligibility criteria, and grounds for misusing a parking permit.

Cool.

So next up is a work session. Tonight's first work session is regarding draft transportation system plan network policies and maps. We will begin the work session with a presentation by planning manager Brian Martin and senior planner Jessica Engelman. When the presentation is done, each counselor will have the opportunity to comment on the presentation and ask questions of the presenter. Please begin your presentation.

Thank you very much, councillors. Good evening. My name is Jessica Engelman. I'm a senior planner in the community development department and I am managing this update to the city's transportation system plan. I'm joined tonight by Brian Martin, the long range planning manager, and we're looking forward to talking with you this evening about the draft network policies and maps developed as part of the TSP update. Next slide. We'd like to start by reminding everyone why the transportation system, why we have a transportation system plan. The primary reason is to be able to communicate what our expectations are both at the community-wide level and at a more granular level as decisions are made about where and what type of infrastructure to require of development and as part of citywide capital and maintenance investment plans. The policies and maps that you're reviewing tonight are part of how we can communicate these expectations. To that end, the TSP allows us to show the locations where there's need and the future infrastructure that can help meet that need. It communicates what the city wants to invest in first and why, and it allows us to estimate the resources needed to make changes. Finally, the TSP is required. We need to be in compliance with state and regional rules. On the right on the slide, you'll see a quote that emphasizes just how impactful infrastructural systems like our transportation system can be. The system can have a big impact on our daily lives. And even small changes to the system, for example, making it safer to walk across the street, can expand the possibilities for what community members can actually do in our city. Next slide. This is our project timeline. We've completed the vision goals and existing conditions work. We're at a critical point where we're looking for direction from you tonight on the policies and network maps. With this, we can go forward with pulling together a draft project list and some investment scenarios for councils to consider at the end of the year. 2027 would be dedicated to getting our implementing documents like our Beaverton code, development code, engineering design manual aligned with the TSP and then taking everything through the legislative process. So full adoption is anticipated in about a year and a half at the end of 2027. Tonight we're interested in hearing if you have any questions or comments about the draft network policies and maps and whether you support staff moving forward with the next stage of work. There are three big themes that run through the draft policies. The first one is safety. Safety is essential. We know that mistakes and crashes happen, but traffic deaths and serious injuries are preventable. We're working toward a future where they are eliminated. Community members told us last summer that they want to walk and they want to bike and they want to roll more often, but they need streets and sidewalks where they feel safe and comfortable doing this. The policies here point toward that future, including designing streets so people can drive at safer, slower speeds. The second theme is adaptation. Given that much of the city is built out, the policies indicate how we can adapt the system from one where a car is almost always necessary for travel to a more resilient system where people of all ages have more affordable travel choices. Cars and trucks will remain a travel option to destinations in the city. What these policies do is set us up to incrementally make it safer and more inviting and more intuitive to also be able to walk, bike, and take public transportation to these destinations. To achieve this, all the networks need to be complete. The pedestrian, the bicycle, the public transportation, the motor vehicle networks. We anticipate relying on more nimble, cost-effective Investments such as using temporary materials to calm traffic and to better define walking, rolling, and biking space on the streets to make these networks safer more quickly. Next, the draft network maps reflect the city's goals and the draft transportation policies. We'd like to briefly walk you through three examples of how this is the case. On the left, you'll see a zoomed in chunk of the pedestrian network map. The policies point toward a network where a person can safely and comfortably reach any destination by walking. This would be accomplished in part by designating pedestrian districts that are inviting to walk in. These are the hatched green areas on the map. You'll find pedestrian districts in centers and where there are many destinations concentrated together. The heat map shows the areas where there's higher concentrations of destinations. The darker the color, the more destinations. You'll also notice red and orange lines on the maps, and these indicate sidewalk caps that if filled could improve pedestrian access to these destinations. Moving on to the bicycle network, let's look at the middle graphic. It shows how an all ages and abilities crosstown bike network could be possible, particularly if we build on what we already have and strategically invest more in safety enhancements along these routes. The idea is that over time, this will create a continuous, easy to use, all ages and abilities bike network that feels safe and usable to most people. It would weave together a variety of facilities, including trails, Calm neighborhood streets and physically protected bike lanes. But neither the bike nor the pedestrian networks can function properly unless people can feel safe crossing the street. So to that end, it's critical to adjust streets and intersections where crashes have occurred previously or people have expressed that they would like it to feel safer. They have concerns. The map on the right shows a zoomed in portion of the priority intersection. and street segment map. The orange blobs on that map are areas where people told us last summer that they wish it felt safer. These are areas that people have indicated concern. The green dots show intersections that are a priority because they play a really critical role in the pedestrian, bike, or public transportation networks. Or they're an intersection that does have a concerning crash history. The policies point toward making intersections safer through lowering motor vehicle speeds, making sure people can see each other, reducing the distances people must walk to cross the street or bike, and adding more protection for vulnerable users. So now let's imagine a couple of here-to-there scenarios to explore how the updated policies and network maps could play out in the future for people living in our community. In this scenario, we have a person who lives near the intersection of Southwest Crestmore and Hall Boulevard. You can see a little home with a heart on it. They like to go jogging on the Fano Creek Trail. You can see a little runner in the corner. And on occasion, after their run, they've considered stopping by 99 Ranch Market to pick up some items for dinner. It's a grocery bag down in the corner, too. But they usually don't because that requires them to cross-haul. They work from home most days. Their kids go to school just down the street at Arco Iris. Their employer provides an annual transit pass, so theoretically they could just hop on and off the bus for a lot of their short local trips. And they've considered becoming a one-car household, but this doesn't feel possible right now unless they could use the Line 76 often to get to school and all the shops near Washington Square. They value living really close to a lot of these daily activities and wish it wasn't so stressful to get to the bus. The speed limit on Hall Boulevard is about 40 miles per hour. This feels unsafe. It's noisy. So they try as much as possible to avoid walking along or across the street. So what could the future look like for this person under the draft policies and maps and if we have the resources to make adjustments to the streets? Target speeds would be lower than today, and halls would be retrofitted with safety enhancements and traffic calming treatments to give cues to drivers to go at or below these lower target speeds. Priority intersections, those green dots, would receive treatments like high visibility crosswalks. There could be added pedestrian signals where there are none today. We could have extra time be given to people walking to get out ahead of any turning cars. The bus service could be upgraded to FX service, which is a higher level that would come with more frequency and operate more reliably because of bus priority treatments. And the area around the grocery store, the trailhead, the school, would be in a pedestrian district, a place where people would want to gather and spend time. Now let's go a little bit further north and imagine a high school student who lives near the intersection of 142nd and Farmington. Again, you can see the home with the heart over there. They go to school at Beaverton High School, a little graduation cap in the center, and they have a part-time job after school at Winco in the Cedar Hill Shopping Center up north with the dollars. They like the home, the school, the work. They're all located within a pretty bikeable distance, but the downside is that there are a lot of big streets with fast moving traffic, like Farmington, Canyon, Cedar Hills, that they either must ride across or ride along. There's a five foot painted bike lane on some parts of the street, but not everywhere. Cars and trucks move at pretty high speeds. The posted speeds are between 30 to 45 miles per hour in this area, so it doesn't feel very safe to be riding directly next to the moving traffic, so instead they choose to ride on the sidewalk, which they feel like they have a little bit more separation from cars. This is okay now, they have a pedal bike, but they would like to get an e-bike once they turn 17, and once that happens, they know that they're not going to be allowed to ride on the sidewalk anymore. So what could the future look like for this teen under these draft policies and maps, if we had the resources to make adjustments to streets in this area? Again, target speeds would be lower than today. Major streets like Farmington Canyon, Cedar Hills, and Hawkin could be retrofitted with safety enhancement and target traffic calming treatments to help people driving stay at or below those lower target speeds. The priority intersections again would receive treatments like bike signals, bike boxes, protected space where the priority bike network crosses those major intersections. This entire area would be in a pedestrian district. FX service is planned for Canyon, Farmington, and Cedar Hills. So generally a lot of pedestrian activity would be expected on the sidewalks, making riding a bike, if they chose to do it with their pedal bike, a far less favorable option. Instead, a couple of east-west and north-south crosstown all ages and abilities priority bike routes would provide them with clearly marked traffic calmed or physically protected bike routes to make that trip to school, to work, and back home again. So how do we get from here to there? What needs to happen to make any of this come to fruition? We need to figure out what types of resources we need, and then consider where we'd want to start first, because we know change would have to happen incrementally. But we want that incremental change to be methodical and strategic. So the policies and maps we're discussing tonight will inform the investment options that we bring back to you later in the year. The policies would also inform modifications to several of the regulatory documents that we use to implement the policies, like the Development Code, the Engineering Design Manual, and the Beaverton Code. And we would need to identify funding if we want to make changes quickly and comprehensively enough so that people can see and use and experience the changes, and we can evaluate their effectiveness. Generally, everything's got to work together to provide clear, cohesive, objective information. The policies and maps here tonight provide information about what type of infrastructure is expected, where, and why. And the regulatory documents coming later in the process will provide the details about the when and how we expect the infrastructure to be delivered. So we're looking forward to hearing from you. Specifically, again, we'd like to hear if you have any questions or comments about the draft network policies and maps and whether you support staff moving forward with this next stage of work. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Teeter. You're up first.

Thank you. I'm really excited about this. I think this is the part of the process where it starts to become more tangible for people when they're able to start seeing more of the networks and kind of what some of our options might be. So I've got a couple questions and then some just very specific comments, but I'll start with the questions. The crosstown bike routes. I really appreciate that map. It looks like some of the crosstown bike routes are shown to be, some are protected bike paths, some are, I think it was neighborhood routes, like low traffic, traffic calming streets. Is there a reason why we might just do, why there's a blend of like protected bike paths for the crosstown routes and also just traffic calming, maybe no protection? Was I reading those maps right?

So the crosstown map that's in the packet is really showing the possibilities that it is possible to make a crosstown grid across the entire city. And to do that, you'd probably need to weave, to do that, to show those lines, you'd need to weave together several of the different types of treatments. but that it's possible to actually do it. That's really the key thing. Going forward, it might be helpful from an organizing perspective to think about, okay, where might we want to invest first? Are there a couple of crosstown routes? It provides a structure for us to have those conversations. I think in general, we're going to need to use all different types to be able to build a fully functional network, particularly if we're looking to do that in any sort of more rapid way.

Yeah, no, I hear that. Just the ability to actually deliver what we're trying to do and do it fairly quickly. That does carry a lot of weight. Years ago, Councilor Duggar talked a lot about having very clear, I don't want to say wayfinding, but routing for people, because I bike a lot of these routes that you've indicated on the map already myself, because I know the streets. Not everybody will know how to get through it. So he talked about like, colored pavement, so you're like, oh, I'm on the red path, or I'll take the red to the orange to get into downtown or something like that. So if we're able to think about how we direct people through beyond just a sign that people could miss, I think that would be helpful. And then I've got a couple other comments here too. Oh, so for the for transit planning, I know we don't plan our own transit, but there was that transit map. What's our involvement there with TriMet? Do we tell TriMet like we really want to bus route here or do we just do they just do what they want?

So the maps that are in here are TriMet's plans for the future. They've done a lot of strategic planning. I know that that's looking out not into the financial world that they're in right now, but they also need to do strategic planning. So that is reflecting that at a regional level. We have been involved in that. so there's several strategic plans they they haven't they've done work thinking about where fx service might be feasible they've looked at what service adjustments might be feasible based on the the performance and the the demographics and the development around any certain area so that's reflecting trimet's work that we have been part of that also it's reflecting some work that metro has done long-range planning that will feed into their next regional transportation plan okay a couple other comments well

My reason for my questioning there is just being worried and concerned about the middle part of Allen Boulevard with bus routes on each side, but not connecting through the district. But that's kind of a little outside of our hands. There are a couple other comments I'll touch on here. The Hall Creek Enhancement Trail is, I think, a really cool hidden gem. But our maps show it still remaining fairly disconnected. IF WE CAN MAKE SURE IT CONNECTS OVER TO BEAVERTON TRANSIT CENTER REALLY WELL, EITHER WITH A CONCEPTUAL TRAIL IN THE FUTURE OR PROTECTED PATHING, THAT WOULD BE GOOD. I JUST DON'T WANT TO LEAVE THAT SUPER ISOLATED. GOING BACK TO THE CROSS TOWN BIKE MAPPING, THERE IS A GAP ALONG SHOLES FERRY AT LOON DRIVE NEAR SHOLES HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY. it could connect down over to Barrows, and I've got that crossing in mind. There was a student who was just killed there just a week or so ago. I think with all the development going on in South Cooper Mountain and North Cooper Mountain, I think getting across Shoals Ferry will be really, really important. So I've got that gap in mind. If there's a route we can have that just goes up Loon Drive, even to the elementary school, I think that could be helpful. I've got a few other specific parts that I'll just share with you all via email so we don't get too in the weeds here. But I really appreciate this direction. I think it's really helpful. I love the quick build stuff, and I love just thinking about the full network of how we build it up.

Thank you. Councillor Tivnan.

Thank you. Councillor Titor asked one of my questions. I just have to call out the planned trail through the Greenway area where 125th is off Brockman. That's been something when I ran for office back in 2019, talking to people at the Greenway NAC, the very first thing they said is, we're not gonna vote for you if you're planning to put a road through there. That was like number one on their list. And it wasn't even on my radar. I had to go to the old TSP to see what they were talking about. And it's pretty clear that we didn't need another road right there. But a trail right there with a bike path is very, very exciting. And to see it on a map just makes it feel even more close to being something that could be turned into a reality. I'm in agreement. I think that I'm excited when I look at this. The only follow-up question I had was actually introduced during public comment. As it related to potentially creating a subarea plan that's very specific around a certain area of town that has a special method around right-of-way design. And it sounded like there was a conversation with staff around that, and I don't... Not sure if tonight is, if it was planned that would come up in a different work session or if this is the time to ask about that. I don't want to derail the conversation too much from discussing the two questions that you had asked. So I just want to pause and check in with you on that.

CONSULTANT, THANK YOU. BRIAN MARTIN, LONG RANGE PLANNING MANAGER. WE DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH A GENTLEMAN WHO TESTIFIED, AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S RIGHT AROUND LIKE 1 15th NORTH OF CANYON. One of the things that it's trying to do is connect all the way from 5th through Fred Meyer and up to Center to give people an alternative for making those north-south connections that doesn't involve Lombard or 217 and just kind of circling around on the arterial roads. And just in general, making a more connected grid-like system in our regional center so you don't always have to go with your car on the arterial to get around. As far as the, can we look at that area specifically, The conversation we had was about an application that the property owner was thinking about, was talking with the current planning staff about, because they were thinking about proposed development there. they're looking at the map and like seeing that there's a road connection that's required so the conversation I suggested was like continuing that conversation with the current planning staff to to work on their potential development now that said those lines come on the map come from the TSP so that connection that goes through and another one that goes over to Lombard from there The TSP is where those requirements live, essentially, because those lines are on the map. They're purposefully sort of designed to say, like, we want to connect here to here and not provide a specific path. because we want to be flexible for when actually development does happen. We want to get people from point A to point B, but we're not designing the actual road and where it has to be because we know things have to adjust when there's plans being made for buildings and other things on the site. so um I'll finish but that long answer by saying um if the council wants like more information on that we'll be back with other TSP work sessions in the future and we can prepare more sort of information with context about what um the reason those are there now and what your options might be

Okay, yeah, just anytime you hear the word sub-area plan, it kind of opens up a larger question in my head of, luckily we have a fairly small city, you know, in terms of our footprint. THERE'S NOT A LOT OF AREAS OF IT THAT I THINK WOULD BE SO DIFFERENT FROM THE REST THAT THEY WOULD REQUIRE THEIR OWN PLAN, BUT IT DOES RAISE A QUESTION OF ARE THERE ANY? I MEAN, WE HEARD SOME COMMENTS TONIGHT ABOUT LACK OF INDUSTRIAL SPACE, LIKE THE USAGE OF LAND AND JUST THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK AND HOW IT INTERACTS WITH ALL THE USES AROUND IT AND THE PEOPLE TRYING TO GET THROUGH IT. SO I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT IN A FUTURE WORK SESSION. I was talking to someone recently about the TSP, and I showed them a copy of the old one, and their first question that came to mind was, you have to do all of this stuff? Where are you gonna get the money for all of this stuff? And I was like, well, it's a plan. It's a plan full of ideas. It's a plan full of ideals that are very much tied to point in time, but also forecasting out. And just like with that road that we've CHANGED OUR THINKING AROUND THE BEST AND HIGHEST USE FOR IT. EVERYTHING THAT LANDS IN HERE DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ANY TIME SOON WHILE WE'RE ON COUNCIL OR MAYBE EVER BECAUSE THINGS MIGHT CHANGE. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING AS WE'RE CONTINUING TO TALK ABOUT THIS IN THE COMMUNITY IS THAT THIS IS A MUCH MORE MACRO ISSUE AND IN SOME WAYS idealistic of what we want the city to be and and then we have to prioritize what we can afford and what is the most urgent to address so but I love the options here yes to question one or sorry no additional questions and I support staff moving forward Thank You councillor Kimme

I'm a fan of transportation systems plan. When I first got elected, I didn't know what that was. Like, what are we talking about? Right? Transportation, I'm looking at cars, right? But it's encompassing everything. And you just mentioned, like, how are we going to pay for this? I'm being very realistic. I said, are we required to do this? And you said, it's mandatory. We have to update this, right, by the state. And my comment was, don't spend too much time on it. We got things to work on. What I'm saying is, we can imagine and put this thing together. But realistically, we need money to do so, and we need coordination from tri-med, coordination from schools, coordination from builders, everything to work together to get this done. So it's great that we're working on this, imagining, but if there's some priority work, I'd rather you spend time on that. What is the next phase if we go forward? What do you mean by next phase?

So I think we're going to be moving into probably a little bit more of what you're looking for of how do we prioritize. We already did sort of a level of prioritization through the network maps and the policies, but then we also need to have a project list and it needs to be prioritized and we need to look at the financial forecast and see what we can afford and then see what else is there and how much and what we might want to do. first and that's a real big part of how you coordinate with everybody and coordinate internally and externally right so that is the next phase of work that we would be using this organizational structure and taking it another level with cost estimates we've asked our consultants to cost estimate what it would take to be able to build out the network like we're talking about in sort of a more rapid implementation way, right? So we'll have more information to be able to bring with you and this provides a structure to be able to start having those conversations about what might be possible, what might you want to do first. And I think just to note we have a TSP now, right? I just always like to remind people and I know mention that and We cannot afford a lot of what's in there right now. It's the same problem It's a different it's just a different set of stuff And so I just would like to always bring that up because this this isn't just coming out of nowhere We have one and this is refreshing and hopefully giving us some options to be able to be a little bit more nimble and do things a little bit differently and

Thank you. So to give you a little bit of feedback on that, what you just said, I would love to see focused on small area first. Let's get that be successful, put all the resources and energy to that, and see how it's going to look. and move on to the bigger picture. What I'm saying is like downtown corridor and then the area that you mentioned, around this area, business district, how we can connect the residents to the business, bring the people here, right? Ride their bike, electric bike, or car, or public transit, they wanna come here and to the major transit centers. That's what I see. So if we focus on this small area that we are all focusing on, Bura, street maintenance, business development, and just make it ideal for people to enjoy, walk around, use their bikes, bicycles. So that would be my feedback to the project. Focus on small area, make it successful, have a model, and expand it out to the entire city somehow, and connect the people to the focal point. And regards to crosswalk, I don't know what the code is right now, but every time I walk, the crosswalk seems very narrow. There's not many people walking, but also because it's narrow, it feels unsafe. Many of the countries that I visit, crosswalks, either everybody's walking or it's kind of wide. So it gives them a little bit of buffer and safety. Maybe 12 feet. But what is the code right now? Six feet? Or is it smaller?

You know, I don't know what our EDM standards are for crosswalks. We do have Jabra here who could answer that question, probably for us. I don't want this to be too long.

You can shout out the number.

Good evening, Jabra Kasho, city transportation engineer. Currently, crosswalks we use between eight and 10 feet, and the crosswalk width is based on how many pedestrians are crossing. There is a capacity for crosswalks too.

Oh, okay. Because I would love to be wider, so that makes people safer to walk. So we are building bicycle lanes, not having many people use bicycle. So maybe we can make people feel safer by making it a little wider. That would be my suggestion. If you could consider that into your CDD and code compliance, maybe that could be something that could be easily done and then make people feel safer to walk. How would you say?

Yes, but also there is other improvements needed when you make the crosswalk wider. Your ADA ramps needs to be wider to match the crosswalk. So you start getting into other improvements that add the cost to it.

Right.

But also you have to weigh the benefit of it. Are you truly increasing safety or it's just a feel-good thing?

Right. So I would imagine it would be safer, but also that's why I said let's focus on small areas that we could do this and then test it out and then see how it goes. So I can tell you I'll be walking much better if it's lighted, bright, and then it's wider. So that would be my feedback. Sorry for bringing you here. Thank you. One last thing. Sorry. No, no, I don't need job, bro. One last thing. Few days ago, I was just driving home from work, and then I see these 30 or 40 young kids with electric scooter and bike, like a mob going across. And I was kind of thinking, is that legal, number one? And what is our code? It seems like that's becoming a trend. So then you say it's not belonging on the sidewalk, so they were on the road. But then now they're impeding traffic. maybe they're part of a traffic. So how was the education? I mentioned a few months ago, regards to maybe asking BPD to educate the kids about electric bicycles, electric scooters, safety education. I just wanted to ask you that question because it seems like if they're gonna use the road, more likely they're going to use electric bike, electric scooter. And as I mentioned, on the walking trails behind, there's a lot of people with electric bikes, electric scooters on the trail too. So this is the conversation I think we will have to have in the future.

Yeah, I mean, I think the technology has gotten out ahead, honestly. And right now, it's not legal to ride any electric bike on the sidewalk. That's state law at this point. But again, I use that example of the teenager because I think it's real. there's also a feeling people are not feeling safe riding in the street, right? And so if there's not infrastructure that they're feeling safe in the street, that they're going to naturally go to the part where they feel like they've got some separation. So I think that we're in sort of a weird place right now of trying to figure out how to be able to, one, educate people too, because once the speeds get up that high, some of these are not electric bikes anymore. They're motorbikes, right? And And there's a big difference and not everybody understands that. So Beaverton Public School District has actually put out some public service announcements to parents trying to help educate everyone of like, what is an e-bike? What's not? When is it legal? Where can you go? You need a license at some point to be able to like actually ride some of these things that we're seeing out there. But this is again, one of those things where the technology is kind of getting out ahead, particularly of the infrastructure, but you're also seeing the vulnerability that people feel even though they might have a lot of power or not understand the risks that they are taking by going at those speeds. Because once you're going at those speeds, it doesn't matter what you're in. The speed is what is going to be detrimental, whether you run into somebody or you yourself are the person falling off.

That's all I have, but I'd love to talk about it in the future.

Thank you.

It was a mob of kids. It was just one kid last night riding through the bike or their bike through the park. And I was like, that's like a dirt bike and it's a 13 year old. And I was like, I am old that I'm the one that's like, but also like, it is very dangerous. And what I love about this plan is the prioritization of the multimodal, right? It is the pedestrian focus. It is, we do need to slow down. One of the things that I've been thinking about a lot is, and I love the intentionality around, we do need to reduce speeds. When you drive to Bend and you go through Sisters and it drops to 20 miles an hour and you do that because that's where the people are, right? Or if you do, I think if you've had the chance to go to Europe, Those buildings are really, really old. Their roads were built before cars were. And so there's these things that are inherently more safe because the built environment forces you to be more safe. And so I love that there's intentionality about this, that our future built environment is going to give more than a written law, right? There's actually the built environment that kind of helps. So I'm... I definitely think we must continue. I think the questions around cost are super valid. I feel like we've had a theme tonight. There's actually been so much about transportation and cost and to start our night with our bike advisory committee, but then to talk about our transportation fee. Having that fee is also critical to lay the foundation for a future transportation system plan that is going to work and will be safe. And so just the interconnectedness of it all is something I've really just enjoyed about tonight's discussion. how the conversation has gone, but it's also, you can see the vision, you can see there's also specific projects, and so I'm also looking forward to getting to that kind of project level, prioritization, hopefully everyone has noticed the new high-vis crosswalks just right out here on Canyon, right? Those things give signals to our community, like, oh, I need to slow down, there's people gonna be here, but also as a pedestrian, you feel safer, you have that access. I think that to me this is a framework to really help us into the future. And the good thing is we do regularly, well, semi-regularly, update them, right? It is a ton of work to build a plan like this. And we may determine that certain things should change in the plan, that they are not feasible or affordable, but also... WHAT I LIKE IS YOU SEE OUR PARTNERS IN THIS PLAN, TOO. THE NETWORK WE WANT TO BUILD CONNECTS THPRD. EVERYONE HAS TO TALK AND WORK TOGETHER FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS TO WORK. I THINK FOR SO MANY OF THE THINGS WE WANTED TO DO AS A CITY OR COUNCIL, WE CAN'T DO ANY OF IT WITHOUT THE RESEARCH AND THE PLAN. NOW WE HAVE THE PLAN. NOW WE GET TO START LOOKING AT HOW CAN WE IMPLEMENT THOSE THINGS. So I think, yeah, let's go to the next phase. Let's keep going. And I know we like to joke about our so many viewers of these meetings, but our survey respondents are pretty low and that's not indicative of the incredible outreach that has happened, right? But there is a survey that's still open for a few more days. So please go take it because this is another chance to shape this. And just kind of looking, I mean, some of these have 14, 15 people. Beaverton is much larger than that. So friends, if you're watching, take the survey. And so yes, I support moving to the next phase and no additional questions from me.

Real briefly, Councilor, I just wanted to mention that we have at least three times more responses since we compiled that partial summary. So we're hoping they keep going.

I'll close this out. Washington County is kicking off their TSP, I believe. I THINK JUNE THEY STARTED LAST MONTH. I MIGHT BE WRONG ABOUT THAT, BUT HOW WILL OUR PLAN ACCOUNT FOR SOME OF THE NETWORK CHANGES WITHIN THE CITY OF BEAVERTON ON COUNTY ROADS? HOW DOES THAT, BECAUSE WE'RE AHEAD OF THEM, RIGHT? IS THERE A WAY WE CAN ACCOUNT FOR NETWORK COMPLETENESS AND THINGS LIKE THAT ACCOUNTING FOR A DIFFERENT JURISDICTION?

IT ABSOLUTELY MAKES SENSE AND WE DEFINITELY WANT TO BE COORDINATING WITH THE COUNTY AS THEY GO FORWARD. I'LL JUST SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, THE BIKE NETWORK MAPS, WE DEFINITELY REFERENCED WORK THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE AND TRYING TO THINK ABOUT WHERE THOSE CONNECTIONS COULD BE. ON THE STREET LEVEL, um you know the county if they own the street they can do what they want with a street and so we we show a lot of things on these county streets and that was intentional to basically be able to have that as a communication tool of how we view that street fitting into the larger land use context and community context and neighborhood context because they do run through the community, right? And we need a way to communicate that. But in the end, the county has jurisdiction over it and their rules and their standards and their planning is what applies to it. So this is really more of a communication tool for us to be able to say how we think it could best fit within our community. THAT MAKES SENSE.

A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE GREAT TRAILS THAT I DIDN'T SEE GREAT TRAILS THAT I DIDN'T SEE ON THE MAPS. ON THE MAPS. WHEN I FIRST MOVED BACK, THERE'S WHEN I FIRST MOVED BACK, THERE'S TONS OF TRAILS AND THEY ARE TONS OF TRAILS AND THEY ARE EXTENSIVELY USED BY BOTH EXTENSIVELY USED BY BOTH PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS. PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GET THAT I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GET THAT INCORPORATED INTO IT. INCORPORATED INTO IT. THEY ARE ALREADY BEING USED AND I THEY ARE ALREADY BEING USED AND I THINK THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE TH REALLY CONNECTS THEM TO THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT OPTIONS WE HAVE THERE FOR INCREASING THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, AUGMENTING IT, AND THEN COMMUNICATING ABOUT IT, BUT I THINK THAT'S AN EASY ONE FOR US.

YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD POINT. TRAILS HAVE NOT BEEN IN THE TSP BEFORE. THAT IS A VERY NEW TERRITORY FOR US, AND WE'RE LEARNING OF HOW TO GET THEM IN THERE AND KIND OF RECONCILE DATA AND WORK WITH OUR PARTNERS ON GETTING THE RIGHT INFORMATION IN THERE.

MY LAST THING IS THE FOCUS ON SAFETY IS 100% CORRECT AND YOU GUYS NAILED IT. I'LL ADD TWO AND I THINK I MENTIONED THIS IN MY BRIEFING. RELIABILITY OF CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE KIND OF SUCKS NOW. IT REALLY DOES. IF WE DID THE SAME THING FOR CARS THAT WE DO FOR BIKES, 5th and 6th out to Murray is a bike boulevard. I'm told by the city I should bike there. And when I get to Murray and 6th, I have to get off my bike and go and push the pedestrian crosswalk because it will not recognize me, the cameras. What if we had to do that as a car? Go to an intersection, hop out of your car, go and press a button, and go back. I mean, that would be ridiculous, right? But that's actually what we're asking our bikes to do right now. And they've done it a few times. They've reset it. So reliability is a thing that I really think we need to focus on, not just safety. Because if it's not reliable, people aren't going to use the infrastructure. And then I think Councilor Titor mentioned it. I think about the experience. Overall experience. When I look at a bike map, it's really complicated. Metro publishes a really, really great one that is really hard to figure out. If you look at it, you're like, man, there's like 75,000 miles and I can't figure out how to get from over here to here because it's like... And so I think about... LIKE SOMETIMES LESS IS MORE. LIKE SIMPLIFICATION AND EXPERIENCE IS A REALLY GOOD THING FOR US TO FOCUS ON. AND I KNOW THAT WILL BE MORE ALONG PRIORITIZATION AND, YOU KNOW, AS WE, YOU KNOW, COUNCILOR KIM, WE TALKED ABOUT ZONES. BUT I THINK INSTEAD OF ZONES, WE FOCUS ON BIGGER LIKE ALMOST LIKE A HIGHWAY SYSTEM FOR BIKES, RIGHT? CONNECTING THE CITY AND JUST A FEW DIFFERENT LANES OR A FEW DIFFERENT ARTERIES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT JUST MAKE IT A REALLY GREAT EXPERIENCE. but simplify it too because wayfinding is real consistently hear that from the bicycle advisory committee is like yeah like you know this isn't compliance we just throw a bike lane and we call it a victory and it's like well how do people even know this exists and if they you know do they feel safe using it do they know how to get there does it do they know where it connects to all of those things make you know we'll make or break this plan for as far as utilization and And we really need to get that utilization up to hit so many of our other goals, the climate goals, transportation goals, everything, right? And so I think safety, number one, reliability, and then just the experience I think is going to be really key. Fantastic work. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, friends, our last thing. We have another work session regarding urban service framework project. We will begin the work session with a presentation by CDD Director Annie Varner and Tom Reinhart from Reinhart Strategies. When the presentation is done, each council will have the opportunity to comment. You guys know how these works. You guys can begin your presentation when you're ready.

Okay, thank you, Council President Duggar and Councilors. The moment you've all been waiting for, I know, before summer break begins. So, yes, I'm Andy Varner, Community Development Director for the City of Beaverton, and with me is Tom Reinhart. He's a project consultant with Washington County. I'm filling in for Lee Crabtree, who has been our project representative for the City of Beaverton. on this project. So the Urban Services Framework Project is a technical study exploring the financial and practical considerations of providing urban services to urban uncorporated areas of Washington County. For this reason, this has been a county-led, Washington County-led project in partnership with City of Beaverton and City of Tigard, as we'll get into in a few slides here, the reasons for that. So Tom's here as part of the county's project consultant team. He will deliver almost all of this presentation and the information on the project background and the findings, and then we'll take questions at the end. Just know that Tom and I met earlier today. I let him know that you've seen a lot of this information, so we'll make sure that the first half of this goes through pretty swiftly, and then we'll get more to the findings and your questions at the end. So go ahead, Jim.

Good evening, Council President and Council Members. My name is Tom Reinhardt. I own a leadership and management consulting company called Reinhardt Strategies. I'm very proud to be a part of the team that ECHO Northwest assembled for this important and complicated project. ECHO Northwest led the technical analysis and project management, and I had the privilege of serving in various leadership roles in Oregon's public sector for almost 15 years, so the team asked me to share the findings and lead any discussion tonight. As you know from previous briefings, this is led by the Washington County and funded by Federal American Rescue Plan Act dollars, and it's intended to provide a common understanding of urban service provision in the county's urban unincorporated areas, which, as I believe you know, have grown in population to over 215,000 residents. I am going to go very quickly through the project context, because I know what time it is, and we've lost two, and I don't want to lose any more. And then I'm going to go through the findings and then finally take questions. Next slide, please. I'm guessing from being here for a little bit that you'll have other questions, but in all the presentations we've done, we've tried to frame it up in terms of what, if any, additional information do you need from the project team. We're happy to get that for you if we can't answer that tonight. Next slide, please. Next slide, please. So as Andy said, this is a technical study. It's not recommendations, and it's focused on the challenge of providing these services in unincorporated areas. The goal is to lay a common foundation for further discussions if you choose to have them with your partners. Next slide, please. As you also know, and as I've been listening over the last few agenda items, you know how complicated it is to provide services and pay for them. And this is even more complex because there are multiple service providers within the same jurisdiction. And while we firmly believe that this project will be helpful, we are not trying to convey all the complexity of the UUA's, the urban unincorporated areas in this presentation. Next slide, please. As I mentioned briefly in the intro, approximately 215,000 people now live in the UAS over a third of Washington County's population. This is growing and has been growing for a long time, and we're going to talk about a little bit of implications of that. Next slide. We could do an entire presentation on UUAs, which you may or may not want, but I know you don't want it now. And for the purpose of the presentation tonight, we just want to remind you that these areas have been in existence since the 1940s, with a significant change, of course, in the 1970s, when Oregon's land use laws went into effect, creating the urban growth boundaries and changing how UUAs are managed. Next slide, please. So leaders built these models over several decades, and we just wanted to give you an idea of, you know, there's rapid expansion here, and in our team's view, it's inarguable that this represents the success, really, of Washington County, that people have voted with their feet to live here. Quality of life was mentioned by the council president earlier. We believe that this really demonstrates the quality of life in the county, and this is a problem, but it's a good problem to have about how to fund them. There have been several studies over the last few decades. I'm not going to go into them now because of time constraints, but happy to reference them in Q&A if you want to do that at the end and hear more about that. Next slide, please. Next slide, please. The collection of organizations on this slide, I just want to give them some credit and just talk about them briefly. This is the network of providers who deserve a lot of credit for collectively serving the urban unincorporated areas in the county over many decades, and you know them well. But as we will emphasize when we get to the findings, costs are growing faster than revenues with the obvious implications for the future. Next slide, please. I'm glad I was here for previous agenda items, because I don't really need to get into this slide with this body. You know what's going on, and you know the pressures. Next slide, please. As you have heard in previous briefings, we're really trying to figure out in this study, what does it really cost to provide service? How are they funded? And how should the county, with its partners in the cities, prepare for the future? Next slide, please. I want to be very clear, as we've done with each jurisdiction, just re-clarifying what the study is and what it isn't. This is a research project, and as you know from research projects in your role, oftentimes people come with assumptions about what the research is attempting to do. This is not a recommendation, it's not a specific proposal. Folks sometimes just come with those preconceived notions. We're trying to provide a snapshot of the current services, what they cost, and some key questions for you as decision makers going forward. Next slide, please. So now we're gonna get into the findings. Next slide. Okay, the project evaluated specific urban services that are required under Oregon state law and under the county's control. The roads, sanitary, sewer, and stormwater, parks but only Metzger Park, law enforcement, and planning and development. The areas that you see on this screen identified by the diagonal lines were chosen because they are locations where the services differ from rural areas. And finally, show examples of where the service provider could change. I want to emphasize could. It's in boldface type in my notes. In the event that you agreed upon a boundary change with partners. I'm guessing that this group will be much more interested in the diagonal blue lines at the top of the screen. So we'll get to that a little bit. Next slide, please. This is just what was studied, what was not studied in reference to what I said before. So you'll see on this that there are a number of things that were left out of the study areas just for complexity purposes and for the case studies to be understandable and viable. Next slide, please. So overall, we want just a quick summary of what we learned regardless of the jurisdiction. This will not surprise this body, but this is very complex and with the multiple funding sources intersecting, there's a lot to untangle. Current funding generally is adequate, but it's not keeping pace since projected to get more difficult. So again, touching back on earlier agenda items that you went through today. The boundary shifts that were studied, potential ones that are just hypothetical in the studies, produced a mix of projected results, much different for the counties and the cities. So you'll be interested, I'm sure, in the Beaverton findings. And our Tigard colleagues were not surprised that the Metzger area is an outlier, and they were interested in that. Next slide, please. For Washington County, key findings for the county leadership, the UUAs are funded mostly through dedicated revenues, again, built up with a patchwork of initiatives and providers, but not with a huge impact on the County General Fund. It's working pretty well, but long-term revenue expense mismatch poses a risk, of course, and any hypothetical boundary changes that were agreed upon and that were moved forward would not have a big change on the County General Fund. And lastly, many unknowns around operation management differences, distinct approaches to finance, and other key questions that would have to be followed up on if folks wanted to move forward on any changes. Next slide, please. We just wanted to provide an illustration of the obligations or costs outpacing revenue projections in law enforcement and road maintenance in these areas. Using numbers from the government partners, we thought it was important for you to see, again, the mismatch of revenue and expense. A note for the folks that are really interested in this, the .3 in the annual growth in the study areas reflects projected infill development and other growth above the 3%. Next slide, please. So I went pretty quickly because I knew the group probably would be more interested in the key findings related to the city of Beaverton. The findings tell a different story for both cities, Beaverton and Tigard, but obviously this is for Beaverton. For the areas that we studied where Washington County has an urban planning area agreement with you, the key point for you to know and hopefully remember from tonight is the economies of scale have a huge impact. In the hypothetical, again, hypothetical that you agreed upon a change in the future with partners, new revenues generated for the city, the city of Beaverton, would exceed projected costs, at least using the numbers that staff shared with the project. This can mostly be attributed to your tax rate and economies of scale and government service infrastructure. You're bigger than Tigard. Can we just hold that for one sec? I know we're going to want to talk about this. Next slide, please. FOR TIGER THE RESULTS AS YOU SEE ARE DIFFERENT WITH ITS SPECIFIC TAX RATE AND SMALLER GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME RATIO OF REVENUE TO COSTS WITH REVENUE AND COSTS ARE CLOSER IN TERMS OF MATCHING THE BULL MOUNTAIN BUT MISMATCHED IN THE METSKER AREA AND BEFORE I GET TO THE KEY FINDINGS IN ALL THE CITIES COUNCILOR I'LL TAKE YOUR QUESTION YEAH WITH THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT'S PERMISSION

Thank you. Yeah. Can you help me understand it? Because I don't quite understand how one of the problem statements from the county's perspective is that the costs don't keep up with providing the services, but now the opposite is true if we switch it to the city.

Correct. Could you go back a slide, please? To the Beaverton side, please. So in the study areas, what happens if in a change from the UUA's management by the city of Beaverton with the numbers provided to the project, with some unanswered questions that you will see on later slides, revenues do exceed obligations, i.e. costs. That's dependent upon economies of scale that the city of Beaverton can provide in terms of much more fixed infrastructure on services and your tax rates differ. We will get to other issues that would need to be explored and resolved, so it's not as clean as the bar graphs indicate, but that was what, in terms of the numbers that were inputted into the project team's show. Thank you. Yeah, you're very welcome. Let's go two slides forward, please. We also thought it was very important to point out that cities provide some services that the county provides in a very limited manner in the UUAs or does not provide at all. This is not well understood in our communities. You talked a little bit about communication on lots of different areas earlier and different issues. This is similar to what the project team discovered. Next slide, please. THERE ARE LOTS OF POLICY AND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS. THE FINDINGS RAISE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND CREATE OPPORTUNITY AS WELL FOR EXPANDING PARTNERSHIPS THROUGH YOUR EXISTING AGREEMENTS WITH THE COUNTY. ROADS JUMP OUT AS AN AREA FOR BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW ANY CHANGE COULD IMPROVE SERVICES. Legally, I want to make sure I emphasize this again, I touched on it earlier, in the hypothetical and in the future, any boundary change occurred, any change of this nature is governed by state statute, which clearly outlines what entity can initiate any changes. Folks are very interested in that, so it's worth saying in this meeting. There's a very prescribed process for that. Next slide, please. What does all this mean? And I know I went fast. I hope you have energy and time for questions. But like many challenges before you each day, the findings don't point towards a single solution. We believe they should be interpreted as a valuable current state assessment, clarifying the pressures and discovering that changing service providers does not necessarily equate to cost savings since there are differences in each area. And to ensure continuity of services, it was pretty clear to the team that if current revenue trends continue, again, pointing back to earlier discussions tonight, this study points towards a need for tighter coordination and decision-making between you and your partners about the path to take. Next slide, please. again following up on the council's good question we believe a number of issues merit further evaluation and study if you want to move forward most of them fall into public safety and infrastructure but we also believe potential impacts with special district partners call for more evaluation with them as well and as you continue discussion we found that current urban service agreements would need to be updated if you wanted to make any changes hope i didn't go too fast i was trying to be sensitive to human nature and what's going on in terms of a long and complicated meeting. I want to leave enough time for questions. I'm going to leave it there. Actually, I should go through one more quickly. Next steps, please. Next slide. So folks know that the project does have a final report that we hope is broadly circulated among staff and discussed. That is being finalized. And one excellent result of this project was an Urban Services 101 lookbook was developed and that is basically how does all this work it's very well done as someone who spent a long time in the public sector and has seen a lot of complex graphics i want to credit the staff of the city of beaverton and tigard and the county staff that put this together because i think it will be valuable for even long-time staff at the city of beaverton to understand there's lots of different dynamics at play between cities and the uas and the county we hope that's broadly circulated and we hope you see it as well So with that, I think now with the next slide, we are ready for questions and discussion.

Thank you for this. This is a topic I've been interested in since before I've been in office, so thank you. I had one question about the slide that Councillor Hartmeyer asked about where it showed the revenues versus obligations. If the neighborhoods were to switch hands from county into city, were those showing obligations that just account for, for example, current infrastructure needs, or does that graphic also account for the cost to actually bring up infrastructure to city standards?

So what those bar graphs reflect, and we do have technical staff here who are able to come up and answer this question as well.

Becky, are you able to come up?

That those bar graphs represent is data that was input, inputted into the team's calculations regarding what it would cost to provide services in the future. Now, I caveated it with every jurisdiction does that a little differently in terms of those items mentioned, but I know that Becky can answer that more comprehensively than I can.

Turn on the mic.

There you go.

Green light. There you go.

Hi, Becky Hewitt, project director with ECHO Northwest from the consultant team. So the costs are for maintenance and for a sort of capital replacement, basically maintaining things according to the jurisdiction's target schedules. We heard a little bit earlier how you are not necessarily able to meet all your target schedules right now, but we heard from staff what those target schedules are. Assuming that sort of same routine maintenance, that's those are the assumed costs. It also includes costs for ADA ramp improvements. Aside from that, one kind of improvement cost, nothing else like filling sidewalk gaps, bringing things up if the city would like a road to be designed a certain way that is different from how it's designed now. None of those other improvement costs beyond ADA ramps are accounted for. in the cost numbers. That's an important limitation just because we don't have estimates from the cities or designs of what the cities would want those roads to look like to be able to say, this is what it would cost. And that's why Tom had noted some of the additional exploration that would be needed to refine those costs.

Okay, thank you, that is helpful. So it focuses mostly on just maintaining current conditions and then the legally required upgrades that we might need to do. That is helpful, because one of my concerns about this topic is that if we were to transition the jurisdictions of these neighborhoods into the city's hands, uh we might need support from outside funding sources whether it's federal or state governments to help offset some infrastructure costs if we were to bring things up to city standards so that that was on my mind as i asked that question one of the pieces of information that could help me in the future is related to that those charts again except i'm curious more and the costs over time So we saw just a brief snapshot of like, oh, this would immediately be a boost in revenues with a very relatively little increase in expenditures that would be required. But I know our fiscal challenges are challenges that are structural and are here every single year. And so seeing a potential timeline of the next five to 10 years if these areas were to change hands, I think that would help me. You two are looking at each other like you already know that answer.

Actually, I was looking at, I think we were looking at each other because there are a lot of dependencies in that to use a technical term. Just the previous presentation or maybe two back in which you're gauging various scenarios just on your road maintenance and where you want to be would obviously impact that answer. So that's when we tried to lay out if you want to go forward, you'd have to reconcile with partners. Where do you want to land on some of those? So there are other questions to dig into and I'm sure Becky can expand on that. Am I on the right track there at least, Becky?

Yeah, the only thing I would add to that is I think it's important to clarify in the charts that folks were raising questions about. wonky economics word but marginal costs versus average costs so the disconnect between the presentations you were hearing about earlier where the city cannot afford all of the costs and what we're showing where it's like look you would take in more revenue you would take in more like increment in revenue than what you would add in costs is because A LOT OF THE COSTS THAT TOM MENTIONED THAT WERE LISTED AND THE OTHER SPECIAL THINGS THAT CITIES DO THAT COUNTIES DON'T DO, WE HAVEN'T ASSUMED HOW MUCH MORE COST IT WOULD TAKE TO SERVE A THOUSAND NEW PEOPLE OR 500 NEW PEOPLE. All of those costs are held constant in those charts. So we're just looking at costs where you can say, okay, this new area would incur these new costs. So you get the additional property tax revenue from the area. You do have to serve additional people. That adds this sort of incremental diffuse cost through the whole system. that we weren't able to accurately quantify. So there's sort of a gap between what we could quantify as cost and how much those would increase. And the revenues we know, right? You add this property, you know what its property value is, you know what the tax revenue is. So I think that's one of those gaps DIFFERENCES IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THIS PRESENTATION AND WHAT YOU HEARD IN THE OTHER PRESENTATIONS. THE TIMING COMPONENT, IT WOULD VERY MUCH DEPEND ON, YOU KNOW, HOW THE AREA CAME INTO THE CITY, WHEN THAT HAPPENED. ALL OF THIS IS A PURE HYPOTHETICAL AS TOM SAID. SO THE TIMING PIECE IS A IS SOMETHING THAT IF ONE OF THESE AREAS OR SOME PIECE OF ONE OF THESE AREAS WERE TO COME IN, THEN THE CITY WOULD WANT TO LOOK MORE CLOSELY AT HOW THE COSTS AND THE REVENUES WOULD PHASE IN FOR THAT AREA.

THANK YOU. THAT HELPS AND THAT MAKES SENSE. THAT'S LIKE WE AREN'T ACCOUNTING FOR THE FACT THAT WE MIGHT NEED TO BUY A WHOLE NEW STREET SWEEPER OR SOMETHING TO SERVICE AN AREA. THERE'S SOME COST THAT WOULD BE SPREAD OUT ACROSS THE SYSTEM. THANK YOU. I THINK I HAVE ONE LAST COMMENT. GENERALLY, ONE OF THE CONCERNS OR PUSHBACKS THAT I THINK PEOPLE WOULD FEEL ON THIS IS JUST THEIR TAX RATES WOULD GO UP IF THEY WERE INTO THE CITY. FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AS A CITY GOVERNMENT, OR AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THESE PEOPLE ARE RECEIVING A LOT OF THE BENEFITS OF BEING IN AND AROUND OR SURROUNDED BY THE CITY OF BEAVERTON. THEY USE OUR STREETS AND THEY our police respond to their areas. If we can respond first, the Sheriff's Office will respond too, but it's all very intertwined, and the rest of the city is subsidizing these areas by our service, so this is all kind of context that's in my mind as we talk about a lot of this, but I think the information is helpful. It helps me think about things in a fuller context, so thank you.

THANK YOU.

I THINK THAT'S A LOT OF WHAT'S ON MY MIND, TOO. YOU LOOK AT THE GRAPH, IT LOOKS DESIRABLE, BUT AS YOU WERE HERE FOR THE WHOLE TIME, YOU'VE HEARD A LOT OF OUR DELIBERATIONS TONIGHT AND THE FEES WE'RE ADDING TO COVER SERVICE COSTS. IT'S A LITTLE TOUGH BECAUSE WE PARTICIPATED IN THIS, RIGHT? WE PUT STAFF TIME AND WHATNOT, BUT I THINK IN TERMS OF WHAT MY PRIORITY IS AS A COUNSELOR RIGHT NOW OR MAYBE WHAT WE'VE SAID AS OUR COUNCIL PRIORITIES ARE, This is not where we could put our time right now, even though like it seems like there's such great opportunity or potential. Right. But I think there's just like a lot more questions that I would need to have answered to know if it's worth putting like more staff effort into this. And I guess just like in a place where we are so resource constrained, like it's just I guess my next steps as a city is like. I'm happy for this information. I'm curious, though, if the county has identified what their next steps are with this.

The full presentation has not yet been done for Washington County, so I'm not able to answer that tonight.

Okay. Yeah, I mean, it's not that what Tigard matters or does doesn't matter. It's just that the county is our partner here. So I would be really curious to know, like, what are their next steps with this, if any? And I think it also, for me, is maybe like an input into like a larger, almost like city master planning conversation versus like a thing that we should pursue right now.

Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Tivnot.

Okay. I remember when I was running for office, I pulled down a map of the city and really scrutinized it. It's often referred to as Swiss cheese. We have so many pockets of unincorporated and a lot of residents have no idea until they do something like run for office and they're like, wait, I actually can't, because I'm not in the city. This also came up again every year with Fourth of July, We have a lot of residents that would love to see a ban go in place, but Washington County won't institute one. And that's been a sticking point for me personally, because how do you enforce something like that if you have pockets of unincorporated riddled throughout your city where they can do it and then the neighbors across the street can't? So there's, I mean, that's but one example. But then I also think about, like, I remember... Telling Jack I was like you can see where the urban growth boundary is when you drive down the road On the urban growth probably you can clearly see it and it's like there's farms. There's open space. There's there's buildings I know that this is what we're talking about is that there are areas that fall outside of that But one of the things that clearly demarcates when you're in an unincorporated area is there's no sidewalks and the infrastructure is minimal. And so my head immediately goes there of when you incorporate and annex in cities that have previously not had the same types of treatments in terms of design or infrastructure, it's one thing to just bring it in, start collecting the revenue and providing the same services you provide to other areas of your city. It's another when the residents start coming to you saying we demand sidewalks and the costs associated with that. I'm just throwing this all out there because we're at the front end of this conversation. There's just so many different considerations that go into play on it. Personally, I would love to know the history of Metzger. I mean, I know it's an old part of town, but how in the world did that end up being what it is today? There's like an asterisk next to it in everything I'm reading. That's an aside. It's late. Sorry. I am very open to this conversation. I would love to have clean, neat boundaries to our city. I would love to be able to just have a much more straightforward understanding of the give and take, the cost benefit of the services, the revenues coming in. I'm really looking forward to continuing to learn about this in future work sessions and I will be doing a much deeper reading of all of this, especially after this presentation, so thank you.

Thank you. I'll close this out. Washington County, the largest unincorporated population in this state, I think pretty close, or not close, right? How does its cost structure providing urban services compare to, say, Multnomah County or Clackamas County?

I don't know the answer to that. Do you, Becky?

We did not do a comparison to other counties, but it does have a much, much, much larger area and more different county service districts than the other counties do because of that.

Yeah, that would be interesting to me. Not necessarily a deep dive, but just kind of a high level, just because I suspect that it's pretty high, just based on the geography. It's hilly, especially in certain parts of the county, which makes it more expensive. One area that does concern me, and I do think about this a lot, is it feels like, and I have no scientific basis for this, we all pay county property taxes too I don't get a lot of services from the county as a city resident. Most of mine is provided. I know that Aloha pays $3 less per ish per thousand of property tax in the city of Beaverton. My guess is they get more counties. And that includes the Enhanced Sheriff's District. That includes the Urban Road Maintenance District. My guess is they get more county services than I do. even though we pay, you know, other than those two specialty districts, we pay similar. And so my question ultimately will be, are Beaverton and Tigard and Hillsborough residents, are we essentially subsidizing unincorporated residents to have that lower tax rate? And I think that's a really important question for us because like to my colleagues like our staff has limited time but if the answer to that is yes and it's a significant subsidy that i think i would like to continue this conversation because there has to be an equitable funding model uh... between the county in the city if the answer is no that i think this is a really interesting thought experiment we probably should just move on unless this is my other caveat As a couple of my colleagues have mentioned if you want to if you want to get a bunch of really angry people to show up at a public meeting Invite them to a conversation on annexation Right and the only reason that is it's because it's a proxy for I'm going to raise your property taxes So if the county is willing to do the hard work and make tax equality central part of this then you remove that argument. Otherwise, this is just a thought exercise. Because those people, if they are in fact getting subsidized, and I don't know if they are, but if they are getting subsidized, they're going to fight to keep that subsidy because that's, you know, who wouldn't, right? And so I think we've got to get down to the real meat of the conversation. between the cities and the county, which is this tax equity and subsidy conversation. Because I can tell you, we also get random applications for annexations, four or five houses a year, I don't know, it's not that many. And that's why you see these maps, that's why Beaverton looks like this. But I guarantee all those people in that wide area that are surrounded by Beaverton, They're using a lot more city services than people in Bethany and Aloha, right? And they're just getting, they're getting it for free. Excuse me, they're getting it for free. And so we've got to have that conversation. Otherwise, I think we've got to move on from this. So thank you, though, for the presentation. Thank you.

We'll relay those comments.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. If that was our last agenda on Council New Business, anyone have anything? Councilor

council teeter yeah thanks um i did want to take a moment and just recognize i mentioned earlier in the meeting but we did have a child who was killed in a crosswalk on shoals ferry at loon drive early in the morning a week and a half ago we talked a lot about transportation tonight And it is incredibly important and I was telling a friend just a couple weeks ago, we have these conversations right now and we're fighting these fights to make our streets safer in the hopes that this generation coming after us and the future leaders coming after us won't have to have these same conversations and these same fights. I want them to have new fights. So there is some serenity and some sadness and weight to a lot of the work that we do. And I want to give people some hope that we are trying to make some things better. And these things do take time, unfortunately. But every little step takes us forward.

And that was a day after we lost a 19-year-old cyclist in Orinco. So we've had two pretty monumental losses in the community over the last couple weeks. So this is, you're absolutely correct, Councilor Teeter. Councilor Hartmeyer-Prigg.

My comments are a little more joyous, and that is the duality of life, right? But Pride in the Park was last weekend. It was really beautiful. I think it was the best weather we've ever had. We weren't scorching, right? But to me, it truly is one of the most joyous things that we get to do with community. But as we're heading out on break Hope to see hopefully we all will see each other at events, right? There's a ton of events coming up during that break and just to get to be in community during this time And thank you to everyone who who makes those things happen, right? I think that there's nowhere better in the summer than Then Oregon, right? So I hope that we all just have a chance to spend time with one another in community and in community during the break time Thank You.

Councillor Kimme

i just wanted to thank uh staff um we had a bunch of light poles or electric poles went out yeah and then i if i fully expected that it's not it's going to be at least a week before they can put up the new poles but next day you know they came up so thanks for staff especially public works working diligently working with the pg to get that running because the small business area

and they need to work so it was wonderful to see that city city in action thank you so much thank you very long and very productive meeting colleagues thank you all unless close it out we adjourned recording stopped