City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, Cammy. Welcome to our 03/04/2026 regular city council meeting. If you please stand for the invocation and pledge of allegiance. Dear heavenly father, thank you so much for our great community. I just wanna extend prayers of, comfort and, for our servicemen and women that were, killed over the weekend, in The Middle East.

I I lift up the countries and the people of the Middle East that this turmoil will end sooner than later. I ask that you keep any of our men and women over there that are in this battle to be safe, come home safely, and just protect them. In your son's name, amen.

Amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Miss Maya, roll call please.

Councilor Patton?

I'm here.

Councilor Maldonado?

Sorry. It's happier.

Councilor Davis?

I assume.

Councilor Stearns?

Here.

Councilor Waterman?

Here.

Mayor Hodson?

Here.

And council president Hensley?

Present. Alright. Thank you, Mina. We have no new staff to introduce, so we'll move into item four, citizen input, public comment on non agenda items and community announcements. There's an opportunity to address the council on non agenda items. If you want to address the council,

on

the back podium there are these fancy white cards. Fill them out, bring them up to our city recorder, and she'll make sure that I get them. If you are not able to be here in person but want to Zoom in, please reach out to city hall by 04:30 on the day of our city council meetings. Maya, do we have anyone online for tonight? No? Okay. I do have two cards. I have miss Roxanne Ross wanting to talk about IP 28, the PEASE Act.

Regis might decide on her time.

I'm not sure. Regis, were you wanting to speak as well?

Yes.

Okay. Oh, you might as

well come up with her.

Can Regis speak first?

You can sit, please. Yeah. Sit.

Regis Peregrine, can be resident.

Hi, Regis. Thank you for being here.

Thank you, mayor Hudson and council president Hensley and the members of the city council. I'm I'm very pleased to be able to be here to talk about IP 28. It it affects hunting and fishing and many other areas. Roxy will talk more about what it affects. What stirs my heart is having raised two boys and fishing and hunting, two nephews that still hunt in Oregon, now a brother that hunts and fishes in Oregon, was a way of life for our family.

And when I was with young children, was the way we fed ourselves. And the kids loved it. And they still fish and hunt today. They don't live in Oregon now, but but what they learned way back when stuck with them and they still carry it on and teach it to their children. So it's part of CAMBI, the FFA everywhere you go, this IP 28 affects animal husbandry,

so

it's just heavy on my heart. Thank you. Thank

Roxanne.

Hello, Mayor Hudson and council president Hensley and the city councilors. My name is Roxanne Ross. I live in Oregon City. I live in the Canby School District boundary and have Canby garbage, but but I am outside your city limits. But I am hoping to share with you about the Peace Act initiative petition 28 because I believe it is gonna affect a lot of people that live in in Canby.

So the PEACE Act stands for People for the Elimination of Animal Cruelty Exemptions. When you look at the text, you'll see a lot of wording that is italicized and in brackets, and that's what they're gonna remove. And by removing it, it changes a lot. So even the ballot title says that it criminalizes injuring, killing animals, including for agriculture, hunting, fishing, trapping, pest control, research, teaching, and it criminalizes some breeding practices. So it will effectively do away with ranching because they won't be able to to slaughter their animals.

It affects how they can transport them so that if they just raise them and try to take them out of state for slaughter, that that will be problematic. And the commercial fishing, of course, and the and the guided hunting and all that, The the roving

slaughter

services and the local meat stores that that will prepare your your game kill for your freezer. The the huge slaughterhouse in Hermiston. But there's a lot that is gonna affect in Canby. You know, imagine Canby residents with a mice or rat problem or Canby restaurants with a mice or rat problem. And you're not allowed to kill you'd be a criminal to kill or trap or harm these rats unless they're you're in fear for your life.

And that wouldn't be the case with mice and rats, most likely. So, you know, the restaurants what would be their recourse? Right? It the the American Kennel Club says that they think it's it's trying to do with pet away with pet ownership because some of the the dog training would be criminalized. The docking of ears and the cropping of tails would be criminalized.

The any assisted breeding would be criminalized. And, you know, sometimes in and around can be you can be driving down a road late at night and the deer jumps right out in front of you. You'll be a criminal if you hit that deer and you harm the deer. Humane euthanasia. You would be a criminal for humane euthanasia.

They they just repeat that you have to let all the animals live out their natural lives. It's it's going to be something that everyone needs to be aware of. It criminalizes the rodeo. They even put that the rodeo would be criminalized right in the ballot title. And here in Camby, you've got the big time rodeo.

You're part of the pro rodeo cowboys association. That's the big leagues where the championship is in Las Vegas. And for so many communities that have the PRCA rodeos, it's part of the identity of the community. And there's many families that have a tradition of going every year. I'm thinking of my niece and her and her mom lives in the city limits and she started going every year as a child and has continued it. And her kids go every year and

a lot

of times they rope us into it too, but Oh, rope. I didn't mean to say it that way. You mean every day, every year. Yeah. Every day, every year.

So You've just I was wanting to give you just a one minute Okay.

Warning here. So, well

I don't think so.

I think I I think I have oh, this does apply to mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. So a snake in your home. Right? But but it doesn't reply apply to crustaceans, so there will still be crabbing at the coast. But I just they have a 102,000 turned in to the secretary of State.

They need a 117,173 to get onto the ballot. They have until the June to get that. And they've been well funded. A lot of their signatures come from paid signature gatherers. So, I just want to get the word out about what this does so that people are aware that when they get approached and asked if they're against animal experimentation to look and see if it says a 28 in the corner and then decide whether you're going to sign. Okay.

Alright. Thank you.

Thank you both very much. Appreciate it. Thanks for coming tonight. That's all I had for citizen input this evening. We'll move on to item five this evening, and that's a special presentation regarding creation of a sister city program with Vietnam. Oh, yes.

Mister Mayor, I just wanna let you know that I got counselor Maldonado on on Zoom.

There he is.

Oh, there he is.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. And, Jamie, are you

Good evening, mayor and council. While the presentation is getting pulled up, my name is Jamie Stickel. I'm the economic development director for the city of Kandy. And while they need no introduction, I will let the two women next to me introduce themselves.

Hi. I am state senator Christine Drazen. Thanks for having me.

Thanks, senator.

Hi. I'm Amy Nguyen from Dreckenberry Pruse.

Thanks, Amy.

And also we have Daniel Wong who is the vice president of the United Vietnam Alliance. Amy is the president of the United Vietnam Alliance, and James Nguyen, who is also with Dragonberry. So And a treasurer

of UVA.

Oh, excuse me, and the treasurer of the United Vietnam Alliance, so a packed house. And I would also like to thank Michelle Suri, who is on the board, who is not able to be here tonight, but she was very helpful in getting the information for tonight's presentation. You'll see on the agenda that there's a presentation, and then also we'll follow-up with a resolution, so some of the language that you'll hear might be twice or, you know, there will be reference to a resolution and that will be on the docket for a little bit later. So I wanted to give just a background about the Sister City International Program. It was formed in 1956 by President Eisenhower as a people to people program.

Looks like they started calling it the Sister City International in 1974. The mission is to promote peace through mutual respect, understanding, cooperation, individual, one community at a time, and it focuses on creating global relationships by based on cultural, educational, informational, and trade exchanges. The creation of Sister City relationships, it can be formed a number of ways. I've listed a couple here, but in my research and in my communication with Sister City International, it seems if there's a will, there's a way is really the way that they want it to work. So cities can join as a member and then be paired with an international city, so they would just pair a city like Canby with a city somewhere else in the world that might be about the same size or have similar trade.

Municipalities can seek pairing due to historical or demographic connections, or community organizations and businesses can recommend a city sister relationship due to trade and cultural relationships, and that's part of the way that we got here this evening. Sister city relationships, they're recognized when the mayor or the highest elected official from two communities sign an agreement, and that can be an agreement or a contract or resolution or a proclamation at the municipal level. Management of those local sister cities organizations is often varied, so they can be run by volunteers, representatives from local institutions, municipality, or a combination, and most are incorporated as a five zero one c three, although the municipal government might have some representation or a formal relationship with that five zero one c three. When I spoke with the Sister City International about initiating a sister city program in Kandy with Bokjiang, Vietnam I'm saying that correctly or close enough. So we were approached.

At Bok Ching is the capital of the Bok Ning province in Vietnam. The request was received from this or to the city through senator Drazen's office after she met with with Amy and Daniel Wong, and the request came through because of the deep cultural and professional connections that Dragonberry produce has in both Vietnam and in Kandy, and those both serve as foundational pieces for any sort of sister city relationship. I included a slide about Dragonberry produce, but I'm gonna turn it over to Amy so that she can talk a little bit about Dragonberry and why these ties are important and also United Vietnam Alliance and why that tie is important. So I'll kind of scan over the next two slides, but I just wanted them there for for some context.

Okay. Thank you very much, Jamie. Hope everyone can hear me. Thank you very much for allowing me to speak a little about Dragonberry Produce and United Vietnam Alliance. First of all, we've been in Oregon in Canby since 2011 was the first year we broke ground on the first building and then we established our final first ribbon cutting in 2013.

Dragonberry has evolved to become a specialty. We not only export, we also import, and importing means that we are probably right now the largest importer of longan and lychee, dragon fruit. These are tropical fruit that Vietnam can produce. We bring back to Vietnam green dragon apples, which we grow out in Hood River, blueberries during the summertime from Townsend Farm. We're probably the largest blueberry exporter to Asia as we cover almost 10 almost all the Asian countries during our peak blueberry season.

And so, becoming such an international company, we are now being like greatest news is we're approached by Costco to be in six new countries this year for a Costco global buy. So, our facility in Canby is a very international agriculture hotspot with our facility over there, and our phase three would be the third packing house that if our business continue to grow and as the rate we are, hopefully we can build that third building for repacking just for Costco's products year round, and that would be this is exciting because our product is, like, not just for Oregon to consume, we're packing product West Of Mississippi, and the peak of our season this year with our lychee will be in all the top across the country going from Canby to New Jersey, Dallas. Currently, right now, the furthest we've gone is like Utah, Arizona, but once we expand, they will open all these new districts for us and it's all produced here in Canby. So, I wanted you to be like, know what, like, the effect that we have here with the tropical even though it's like, how is that possible with the tropical products that we have and we actually are providing this to the consumer year round.

So, Bakayang is something new. We develop our own in order to become quality house, we have to get more involved with the product and the grower in the Bakayang Province, Bakayang Province, Bakayang City. Vietnam used to have 62 providence with the under the new secretary, Tholam, he redesigned to only 32 providence. So, a providence is quite big. It's similar to what we say state here in The United States and where the proposal of the sister city is to be with Bakkian.

Bakknin is the providence. So, what is being in that area? That's the major hub of where lychee is grown. It is also a major hub of where all the Samsungs are being produced. It's a big it's about an hour or two away from Hifeng Port by by travel.

We have established our office in Bakknin's Bakayang City, so the connection is Dragonberry is the bridge to Bridge The Canby, where we have a facility here and are becoming our facility there in Bacconi, so that would be where we can help create the bridge for the two cities to, you know, connect it. Opportunities. What are the opportunities? I feel that this will open the floodgate of the future, like students, businesses. There are a lot of manufacturing business here in Canby being exposed to a city in Vietnam.

Vietnam is probably the third or fifth largest trading partner with United States. They a lot of manufacturers done there, but they also buy a lot of raw material. For example, they buy a lot of wood. They buy a lot of cotton. They buy a lot of products here in The States so that it can be produced.

Vietnam produced a lot of furniture, but they don't the woods come from United States. Vietnam makes apparel, makes shoes, but the product comes here from Oregon. So, this is where a lot of people say, well, where's the export import? But, the raw material is here in The States to go back and be able to produce it. I wanted to Vietnam Alliance was meant to open and be the bridge for trade, and so we wanted to be so we use United Vietnam Alliance to be the one where we'll connect the CAMBI being a nonprofit, we'll connect CAMBI and Bakayang together so that we can be aligned.

One of the things that we're gonna fundraise with this approval of the city is that we want to help city of Canby to help build we will fundraise. And, one of the gifts that we would do at the opening cutting is the water well project. They have a lot of areas where they don't have a lot of good access to water, so we're fundraising, and we want to use that as a project to where once this is signed, this will be the gift from the city of Canby to Backend. And so, that's what UVA do is we do fundraising for golf events. We do funding at galas.

We do funding different that to raise money so that it helps. We also help with the Fulbright Scholar out of Vietnam that comes to OSU. We are the bridge for not just the students, the community, but also, like, education, the connection the the extension office where we we introduce the University in Vietnam to those programs we have in the state so that they can have a more connection easily. So, that is usually that is what Dragonberry does. That's what UVA do, and we're here to connect and create this bridge.

So, if there's it it becomes a nicer way of being introduced to a foreign country. And, of course, also for them who also wants to come and experience Oregon, experience what America is like, They also would also have a home for someone who could help them lead, and I think it's a very reciprocal programs for the two cities. Thank you.

Thank you. Oh, thank you.

And one of the things in my research as I was reaching out, I was connected with someone in Seattle and they've had a sister city relationship with a city in Vietnam since, I think, the early nineties, and they were talking about students being able to go visit either way, and I said, you know, I'm a rotary member, and we talk about having high school students come over, and wouldn't it be something special to then connect UVA with the Kambi rotary, with, you know, Bakkgang and have them, you know, have that relationship as a possibility down the road. It just it's one business and and one nonprofit today, but the reach in our community and the reach in in Vietnam is, you know, exponential. And so I just wanted to talk a little bit about the process. So, again, while there's lots of different ways to be to create a sister city relationship, When speaking with Sister City International, they recommended that sister both cities adopt resolutions or the appropriate corresponding action, which would affirm their commitment. And then I have it noted resolution fourteen fifty two, which that will come before you during ordinances and resolutions this evening.

After that, it would be then a memorandum of understanding would be signed by the mayors of both cities, and it would be signed in English and in Vietnamese, and, each city would have copy of that. And then senator Drazen plans to visit Vietnam with Amy and has graciously offered to be that conduit to help to carry the MOU, the memorandum of understanding from Canby to Bakhian. And do you wanna say?

So just very briefly, thank you counselors, thank you mayor, thank you president Hensley, members of the members of the city council. I just really viewed this as an extraordinary opportunity for our for our community to be able to support these larger goals around trade for our state. Dragonberry is an absolute hidden gem for our state and certainly for our community. And the opportunity to just have exponential impact from this relationship and from the possibility of creating a sister city relationship. I just appreciate your consideration.

I think that there is very real potential here for growth and certainly for not just cultural exchange, but also trade that could certainly benefit our community and our state. So, thank you guys for for today.

Thank you, senator.

Thank you. And,

that concludes the presentation for the presentation piece. As I said, I will be back for resolutions but if you have any questions now for any of us, you are free to ask them now or, again, you'll have another opportunity during resolutions.

Guess not? No?

Okay. Perfect.

Thank you both very, much. Appreciate it. We'll be we'll be back here shortly. Yes, Jamie?

Can't wait. Okay.

Looking forward to it.

Alright. We will quickly get to those then shortly. We don't have any items from the consent agenda that are being removed. So item seven, I need to approve the consent agenda, please.

Mister mayor, I move to approve the consent agenda that includes the approval of the 02/04/2020 City Council regular meeting minutes. Second.

Motion's been made by council president Hensley and second by councilor Patton to approve the consent agenda which include the 02/04/2026 City Council regular meeting minutes. All those in favor?

Aye. Anyone

opposed? Aye.

And that passes six zero. Did I miss something?

No. Mister mayor, I'm just gonna point out sorry. Didn't see you over there. Before we get to ordinances and resolutions, staff is happy to promote item c first for our guests for consideration. Apologize. I probably should have done that originally in the agenda. No.

I appreciate that. Yes. We can If it pleases the council, we'll move item c Sure. Nine c to the front of the list there. Okay. So moving into ordinances and resolutions, we'll go so item c first. So resolution number one four five two, a resolution authorizing the initiation of a sister city program with Bakh Jiang. Did I do that right? Thank you. I'm practicing. Vietnam and authorizing the mayor to sign a memorandum of understanding. Miss Tickel.

Yes.

Hi.

Hello. Much of the presentation that you just saw was in the staff report. Would you like me to still go through the staff report? Or

No. I think that there's questions, you know, when this was first brought up, there was a question of, like, annual impact budget wise if we do move forward with this. Is there a what is that budget impact?

There's an annual fee. I would imagine that, like much many organizations out there that it goes up over time, but this year it's $440 for a city of our size and, you know, that it's possible that as as you heard in the presentation that eventually this transitions out of a city function and into a nonprofit, whether that's with the United Vietnam Alliance or another nonprofit that would likely have a fundraising arm, but the very first initial would be $440.

Okay. Thank you. Is there questions for Jamie on the matter? Yes. Councilor Patton?

I don't have any questions per se. And before I go into what I have here, I just wanna say that I am all for moving forward with this. I think that you are a very valued partner within the city. Your business and the things that you do in our community to make it stronger. And I appreciate the connection that this will create as far as not only just people, but also for economic needs within the city.

The thing that was that struck me about this was that and we've kind of been talking about this as if this is a new thing for the city, but really it's not. Because several years ago, we had a sister city program with a city called I think it was Kurosawa, Japan.

Correct.

And the folks had worked very hard to cultivate that relationship. We have some parks and other things in the city that was part of that. I actually was, the I housed one of the male chaperones several times in their trips here. And I was under the impression that the reason that whole program was axed, was because of budget constraints. So I guess to me, it seems, again, I'm totally gonna vote for this, but it seems a shame that we abandoned that relationship, and now we're moving forward with this one.

And to me, that just doesn't sit right. So I'm gonna I'm I have no problem with this, but for the people that worked really hard in having that program and stuff to have it go away, I it just is is a shame.

May I?

Yes, please. I believe if Canby is if we pay that $440, we can work to also reestablish that. That sister city relationship was before my time, which is crazy because I've been here for now almost fourteen years and feels like a lifetime. But we could work towards reestablishing that relationship and those pieces and seeing if there's a way to put that back together. And I don't think that it is $440 for every city. I think it would be that Canby's payment would be $440, and that's something that we could certainly look into.

Yeah. And I unfortunately, I think that because it's been so long that all those people are have given up. Yeah. So, I mean, there is that. But I just wanted to make it clear that I for those people who promoted that within the city who are now sitting in TV land and listening to this, I'm sure that there is some consternation there and some questions. So I wanted to at least make sure that that came forward in this conversation.

K. Thank you, sir. I Amy, yes. Please come back up.

I just wanted to I just wanted to

say that as a city, we can have multiple sister cities. Mhmm. So I don't think it's abandoned. I think it's just to have to rebuild. Yeah. We do business in Japan. That's our one of outside of our US weekly support hospitals in Japan a lot. And so we can see where it is and I can help reach out and and when I'm in Japan. I'm in Japan every year, full time. So that's something that I can reach out and help for that.

And if if the city would like to, but the issue is that you still need a nonprofit and organization to continue building that. So you have to have the infrastructure to say, okay, the city agreed, but then where is your working component? Correct. Would have and so I'm happy to have it, but to maintain the relationship is something to think about. And we can have probably 10 sister cities. The more relationships we have, the more the doors open up the city

of Campaign. Mhmm.

Thank you. So much.

Yes, councilor Pradden.

I'd like to make a motion. Okay. Is that okay?

Sure.

I move to adopt resolution number fourteen fifty two, a resolution authorizing the initiation, sorry, of a sister city program with Bach Yeah. Jing? Yeah. Sorry. I butchered that. Vietnam and authorizing mayor Hodson to sign the memorandum of understanding or

MOU. Second.

Motion's been made by councilor Patton and second by councilor Hensley to approve resolution number one four five two, a a resolution authorizing the initiation of a sister city program with Baijiang, Vietnam, and authorizing the mayor to sign a memorandum of understanding. Before I ask for the vote, I will just say thank you for initiating this and driving this forward. I think, you know, Amy and James watching Dragonberry grow the way it has here in Cambium going back to when it first started and decided to choose Cambium. It's been a great adventure to be a part of and watch it grow the way that it has and how you've introduced a lot of Pacific Northwest agriculture to that part of the world and vice versa. So thank you for that.

And Daniel, I appreciate the work you're doing too with UVA. I know when that first was being put together and there was a large event here in Cambia, I think you have done a great job promoting the Vietnam community here in Cambia and just in the Northwest. Thank you for that very much. And senator Drazen, thank you very much for your support of Cambia and all the things that you have done, for a number of years. So thank you for helping to drive this forward as well. I'm excited about where this will go for Cambium and this new relationship internationally. So thank you for that. If there are no other comments, I'll take all those in favor.

Aye. Aye.

Anyone opposed? Alright. That passes. Thank you very much you guys and look forward to the next steps in this program.

Thank you all.

Thank you. Alright. Next on the agenda, we'll go back to the top and go 9A, ordinance number sixteen sixty three, an ordinance authorizing the interim city administrator to extend by nine months the contract with MS and W Group LLC in the amount of $113,760 for the remainder of the year for custodial services for the city of Camby and roll call vote. So this is again just about our just extending that contract as we decide what to do next.

That's right.

And get through the budgeting process with our cleaning services. So is there any other questions for did I leave anything out, Randy?

No. You perfectly had second reading, so appreciate your help on this one.

Okay.

Is there any questions or comments for staff on this? Yes. Councilor Patton.

I move to approve ordinance number sixteen sixty three, an ordinance authorizing the interim city administrator to extend by nine months the contract with MSNW Group LLC in the amount of $113,760 for the remainder of the year for custodial services for the city of Canby on a second reading with roll call vote.

Thank you. Second. Thank you, sir. Motion has been made by councilor Patton and seconded by councilor Waterman to approve ordinance number one six six three, authorizing the interim city administrator to extend by nine months the contract with MS and W Group LLC in the amount of a 100 $113,760 for the remainder of the, year for custodial services for the city of Canby. And a roll call vote.

Councilor Patton?

Aye.

Councilor Maldonado?

Aye.

Councilor Davis?

Aye.

Councilor Stearns?

Aye.

Councilor Waterman?

Aye.

And council president Hensley? Aye.

Great. Thank you, everyone. Item nine b, ordinance number one six six four, an ordinance approving interim city administrator to enter into an agreement with PumpTech to purchase the diesel engine trailer in the amount of $57,690, also second reading. And, Randy, I'll let you recap that one.

Thank you, mister mayor. Members of council, you might recall last council meeting, we had a question about the price, because one of the options was to purchase on a credit card, which would have cost a couple extra thousand dollars. So did confirm with Patrick and staff that we are not, in fact, going that route, so that is the accurate number. And we appreciate a second reading.

Great. Thank you. Yes, Paul. Thank you.

I move to adopt ordinance number sixteen sixty four, an ordinance approving interim city administrator to execute a contract with Pump Tech to purchase the diesel engine pump trailer in the amount of $57,690.

One second.

I just have a question.

Oh, yes. Sorry.

If I remember the last meeting when we approved it for up to a different amount, is that gonna cause a problem with having the the the motion of different a little different wording second time around from that ordinance?

No. Appreciate the question. Thank you for that. This is the number.

K. Good question. Thank you. Yeah. So motion's been, moved by councilor Waterman and seconded by council president Hensley to approve ordinance number one six six four, an ordinance authorizing, or yes. Sorry. Ordinance approving interim city administrator to execute a contract with PumpTech to purchase the diesel engine pump trailer in the amount of $57,690. All those in favor?

Aye. No. It's No.

A roll call vote.

Oh, yeah. Was. Councilor Patton?

Aye.

Councilor Maldonado?

Aye.

Councilor Davis?

Aye.

Councilor Stearns? Aye. Councilor Waterman?

Aye.

And council president Hensley?

Aye.

That motion carries six zero. We have no public hearings, so we're gonna move into other business, which is the continuation of the Parks SDC discussion, and I believe that is Mr. Hardee's.

Hello, sir. Good evening. Good evening, mayor and council members. Randy, I'm just gonna dive right in.

Yeah, please do, John.

So, this is a continuation of our discussion, our previous discussion on Park SDCs. We have a fairly short PowerPoint presentation and it kind of boils down what we all talked about last round, which is looking at reducing the twenty year park SDC list. Just to fairly highlights here, that would be indexed from first the Parks Advisory Group recommendation. Second, to the PEP, what we're calling the PAT and Plan. Third,

to

the Davis Plan. And then fourth is an outlier, is identifying really just more for reference purposes. The goal here and the objective here is to make these rates so that they're sensitivity wise not greater than for sure 8% and targeted really more for something below that in the six to 7% range. There are several layers to this and I was just gonna walk you all through that. But those layers are first, what can be done in terms of reducing that sensitivity by reducing the parks list.

And secondly, what can be what else is that result if we do a three or five year phase in on top of that, which is another layer and the math will go through that with you. So, I've got the slide deck here. So, just kind of covered where we were at before and we are planning to go back after this meeting tonight to the Parks Advisory Group again to get your final agreement hopefully tonight and then talk we'll talk with Parks and Rec Advisory Group on March 17 and then we'll come back again on March 25 with hopefully the final final park list and moving forward with a methodology for the parks SDC methodology, which will then allow us to set the hearing and adopt this. So, hopefully you can read this and it's in your packet. So, this is the first is the Parks Advisory Committee where we started last time we were looking at this $145,000,000 and that's was reduced down.

And this is what we're calling the patent plan for a lack of better terminology at 109,000,000. And then, went to the Davis plan, which is about 100,000,000. And I can go back to these slides, I'm going to kind of give you an overview and then we can go back and forth. And then we looked at this outlier as well, which would be combining what our projects one, two and four. This is again just for reference, which should be the sports complex and the aquatic center.

And that would be $55,000,000 index and we're doing that for a purpose. And that's the next slide. Here, give me one sec here Before I get to this, I wanted to go to Okay, there's a it seems like we're missing a slide. Give me one second.

While he looks for that the big picture here council mayor thank you for your work on this. As as we tried to truncate the list, with all these projects tied back to community visioning through the parks and rec master plan, I don't want that narrative to get lost because we are going back to your parks and rec committee after this. So thank you. What we learned is that whittling down the number did not change that sensitivity percentage as much as we thought. What changes it is phasing in one, two, three, four, five years like you have been talking about that really changes the sensitivity brings it down to like 5% of the cost of a new construction for a home versus this eight or 9% number that we're trying to avoid.

So if you cap it in the first year, you only do 50% of your proposed STC, let's say, and then you go to 75% and then you go to a 100, these are ways to really keep it tied and tethered to a 5% number. And so that's what we learned through all this exercise. So thank you for your help on working on this with us and getting us to while they work on the next slide. If you have any questions, can see the number in some of these alternatives that don't really change that sensitivity percentage at the bottom column. What we're highlighting is parks and transportation SDCs.

As you do storm and wastewater SDCs, they're not going to change as much. The two that are going to change the most are parks and transportation. Phasing both of those in will keep us, and I know words matter so I'll be careful here, lower than the highest SDC in the state which was what we were talking about. We do not want to be. Don't think I've heard that direction from counsel.

So that's where we're at tonight. And please know that we do plan to go back to your Parks and Recs Committee as the next step and share out learnings and make sure that they can see their work in this cause they helped whittle the list and consolidate some of those multi named projects that kind of covered several areas for a sports complex and land acquisition or a pool, community pool in Camby. And we are gonna go tour a couple pools and rec centers on March 20 at the YMCA in Sherwood and the Chehalem Aquatic and Fitness Center. I have a couple school district personnel going with this and counsel and staff.

Sorry about that. This was the slide I was trying to get to which is on the sensitivity and Randy, you for the description there. Just going through the alternatives quickly with the adjustments on the total dollar amounts. Alternative one you can see which is Parks and Rec, 8.2% is of a home price that would be at 8.2% alternative to which is patent 7.9 the Davis plan was 7.6% and even the outlier at 55,000,000 was 6,600,000.0. The next slide I was

gonna 6.6%.

Sorry, 6.6%.

So just freeze it there, Don. So they can see, making the number smaller did not change the sensitivity index. That's what the purpose of this slide is is sharing which we thought might even if you take it down to 55,000,000 you still don't move the needle as much as you wanted to. Don, what's the answer then?

So the going into the phasing can I advance this? Okay.

Can try and then if not, I'll switch it back.

Okay. Oh, yeah, perfect. Here we go.

All right.

Okay. We're back.

Now, here's the phasing.

So, with the phasing, this is the three year and this again is under the patent, what we're calling the patent plan. So you can see year one is at 5% doing a three year phase in and year two would be 6% and then at year three we're back at 8%. But at least it softens the amount over time. And then when you look at this on a five year basis and the difference between the three and the five is these increments on the parks part are about 4,000 to $5,000 an increment on the change. On the five year plan, they're about $2,000 an increment.

And you can see year one on again, we're looking at 6%, year 26%, 37%, and year 47%, and then year five would be 8%. And then even kind of shifting that a bit further, they're fairly similar numbers, what we're calling the Davis plan here at the same thing. And three year plan, year one to 5%, year two is two is 6% and year three is 7%, slightly less. And then under the five year plan same thing year 15%, 25%, 36%, 4657%. So this kind of gives you an idea that like it would be a recommendation that these be phased in over time as our recommendation.

I think that makes sense and gets us to where we are indexed. Now the next thing I was going to share we yeah. Bring

The mayor may

Yes, sorry. Just Thanks, Don. So the recommendation being from staff phase in is the recommendation. Is it the three or five year are you recommending?

I mean, think either would work. Would say we're recommending the three year at this point. And I was going to go to another slide to see you have an index as to where this puts CAMBI in the broader perspective of things. And maybe that would help in counsel's discussions here about that question.

Okay. So then my follow-up question, whether we do the three or the five year phase in when we get to year five, we so with what's on the screen, let's say it is the the Davis plan. So we're at that 7%. Year six, what happens? Are we now on an inflationary increase? Are we is that an arbitrary, like, increase that we'll be looking at It our our yearly fee sheet? What happen after that?

It would stay at that same, I believe it would stay at that same percentage because we're at the maximum. When you get over to the far right, that is the maximum amount that would be collected on both slides, on both three and five year slides. So that increment is the total amount that would be collected. That would, so So it would be seven, it would be seven, it remains, I would believe it would remain 7% on the five year. Okay.

And so refresh my memory and why is it capped at 7%? Who caps that?

That that is based on the amount of cost of the overall SDCs, not just parks, but collectively all of them together, including water, which we don't that's not city service. Collectively, that would be 7% of the cost of a baseline home price of $685,000 That would be that's the basis of that.

So that is a a legislated percentage?

It's not legislated. It's really up to us as to what we should determine, but the sensitivity analysis is intended to look at things. We ask our consultants like how much is too much where it starts to impact development and the general rule is the five to 8% rule. I mean, that's where it's at.

I mean,

there's not an exact magic number, but beyond 8% is gonna definitely have some impacts for development. Even the local developers we've talked to have talked about while they were surprised at the Wilsonville because they did it all at once. They didn't phase it in. They said please, please phase this in over time was our recommendation. Because a lot of these are multiple phase subdivisions and those kinds of things that we're dealing with.

Okay. So if we if so 8% is just kind of our best.

It's yeah we

best target number.

We would not recommend anything above 8%. In fact, I would love to get to six or seven, but like after running these numbers and still having a viable parks plan in the end, it's really a balancing point. Transportation is one that's pretty well set because it's health and safety and level of service established basis. It's really not so much it's more quantitative than qualitative on that aspect, so we really can't adjust that. But on the park side, it does make a difference in terms of how we get there.

But we're not recommending the outlier plan at all, but it just it was a way of us saying, can you get it so low that you can get to the magic like 6% or 7% and you're not going to a viable parks plan if we do that. It comes back to like this recommendation of doing this phase in and I think a three year would make sense. We are open to a five year as well if that's council's directive.

Okay. Thank you, Don. Appreciate that.

There is that slide, Maya, the second sheet. These guys here, you have this? Yeah. So I just I wanted to bring one more thing up. So this might help and

Mike Don, just

Yes, sir. Question.

Oh, no.

I was gonna let Pete folks know that if you are looking at the slide, the slide number seven is hidden. So if you click on the slide and right click and then go down to unhide slide, it will show up in the presentation if you're looking at it on

your computer.

So my question was on that the previous the the three year and five year. Mhmm. Was there a three year and five year list on there for the Parks original plan? That was my question.

You're reading my brain.

The You

just started on the

screen. Yeah.

Meaning the one at Parks

Yeah, before the cuts.

We that well, that is on the summary slide that was hidden that which which is 8.2%.

So but then the number two is only 7.9%.

Number two is 7.9%

and alternative Five. Yeah.

If you did the five year, three year kind

of a long time. They are. I mean Especially

we don't have to make the cuts.

Right. The differential here is it does increase the amount of the SDC. Can see in the middle there sandwiched in the middle that if that was chosen that the rate for an individual home would be 21,188 on the Parks and Rec Advisory Committee versus the low end which should be the Davis plan at 16,733. The sensitivity piece number you're correct on that. It has a real basis and value, however, which is the cost.

Yeah. If that makes sense. Doctor. Scharns.

Just doing a little bit of math here. Assuming that we have I'll just go with Patton's plan just because I have the numbers on my spreadsheet here. It would be 7.9% for a $685,000 house. But if we wanted to go for sort of what we've talked about target, lower affordable, whatever that means, housing, and just say $400,000 that bumps up the SCCs to over 13% of the cost of that particular house. And since it seems like you're going to have a the SEC is such a huge component of building anything like that, it may make it it may make the affordable housing not affordable anymore.

So, if I can answer that question

first. What

we covered and I believe it was on our last round is there will be this is indicating the top tier so there' another breakdown as well that we have not we were not intending to necessarily go over tonight but there' a breakdown of and there' three tiers here I believe it' under 1,000 or 300 to 300 to 800 square feet or 300 to a thousand square feet a thousand to 2,500 square feet and above 2,500 square feet. This is representing above 2,500 square feet as a general reference point so there would be a reduction in cost for those tiers as well. And that's another element to this as well. And so good point. I mean, would still make this affordability more challenging, but there are going to be the differentials between those in terms of rates based on the home size.

Yeah, I was what I was gonna point out to make sure our fee structure is in line with our overall goals for housing. Mean, and obviously the reason why you tax the rich and not the poor is because that's where the money is You can't get them out of the poor people. And so if we're going to have a free structure, I think that has a huge percentage of the building costs being part of it. It'll disincentivize the lower income and push up the higher income. So having a $685,000 house with $53,000 as STC, why not put it up to a $1,000,000 house you know, so that the STC is a smaller percentage of it and your profit margin is a little bit better as the the builder.

And like I say, the STCs are not the only cost input, but they seem to be a very big cost input, you know, or a considerable one if you're gonna be estimating the house of the cost of building a house in Camby. That was just gonna where I was leading with that is is we make sure the structure of the fee doesn't encourage the the opposite of what we intend.

All good points. Think on this basis, we're really trying to just get to average home price, is that unfortunately is about $685,000 I'm not disagreeing with anything else you said, but I think there are some other elements here that would make that slightly less costly based on those tiered elements, tiered elements of the size of the home.

Yeah. And the $6.85 I know is correct because I purchased a house here a couple years ago and that is a correct value. But the $685,000 house is much bigger than what used to be lower. So there's definitely something motivating the people to build bigger houses, which bigger houses always cost more than smaller houses. And so if we wanted to not have these giant houses, we might want to incentivize something else like in our SDC structure.

What I see is our opportunity is to make sure these are structured in a way that are smart instead of having these just gigantic houses that fill up the entire lot to have something a little bit smaller. So that's kind of my point. I know you had something to say, Jason, about it.

Yes, I'm sorry.

Yeah, so I was just going to say to that line and something that we talked about at previous meetings was, to me, the way you achieve what you are trying to achieve is not to make the fee lower for somebody who can afford it. It's to incentivize a builder to build an affordable house by giving them an incentive of reduction in fees to do so with the caveat that once that house is built, it must be an affordable house and stay that way. So if you're going to give if if we want affordable housing rather than incentivize builders to build big houses by reducing the fee, we increase the fees so that we get the money from them to build the big houses, but incentivize builders through fee reductions to build an affordable house with the stipulation that that house must remain affordable. That's to me, that is how you do that because otherwise, we are gonna continue to give money away. We're going to continue to leave money on the table that we have been leaving on the table for years.

J. Yeah. And I see what you're saying there. But if you have some sort of deed restriction that forces that house to always be affordable, which really means a low price or something to that effect, then what are you doing? You're just basically dis incentivizing people from actually investing in a house because you know you'll have no growth on your investment at that point.

By having a permanent restriction on it, it's going to basically create or incentivize blighted areas because you're prohibited from actually responding to market. What I want to do is I try to push the market in the right direction, not necessarily lock a house in. Because if somebody came to me and said, your house can never go up in value. Otherwise, we'll you know, give you some sort of because of a deed restriction or something, then all of a sudden, I'm probably gonna wanna look for another house. You know?

Yeah. And I did not say permanent.

But you said remain, know, affordable.

For a period of So that they don't just build the house and say it's gonna be affordable, and then all of a sudden it's on

Yeah. We have to be very limited with having Airbnb. Deed restrictions on there because Yeah. Because then you're gonna end up, you know, it costs money. Mhmm. It'll never stop costing money to have houses.

And I think the second point was, I believe you have two more slides to go through, which I think would guide the next part of this conversation.

Believe this is where does this put us not to solve this issue on affordability at all but where does this put us in the index both in terms of these phase ins related to other jurisdictions within the region and where does that put CAMBI. There's two slides here, one of them shown in slightly different ways, you can see on the far left Silverton, and then right next to that is our existing, it's can be for STCs, that's current. And then you go over about a quarter of the way through, and you can see the or actually a little a couple over, and there's 50%, and you can see CANB indexed in comparison to the other other jurisdictions. Then a few other few other slots to the right of that you can see 75% where that shows can be. And then 100% is flagged here at 52,019 in the middle.

And that's total SDCs combined together. But you can see how that indexes with the other jurisdictions in the metro area, general metro area, and that just gives a reference. And then that next slide, Maya, you can. Another way of showing this is again slightly different format it's kind of hard to see the gray lines here but you can see on the top can be existing and then the 50 and where that puts us at 5075% and then 100% on this. And then the far right are the values of the cost of that would be in cumulative total.

You can see there are some jurisdictions above that 52,000 line and some below that. These both kind of give a comparison here.

I will just point out our friends to the west in Hillsborough are some of the most aggressive in there as you can tell the slide and a lot of development coming their way and they' trying to capture every penny. They break it down by different areas of their city even.

I I want to thank Don, the consulting firm and staff and everybody because there's been a lot of work put into this and I know it can be a little frustrating as we want a lot of information but just because we're getting information and some people in the community seem to think because we're looking at different solutions we've made a decision and I don't think we have. Think we just need to make sure we do our due diligence and see all the different options that are out there from the very lowest to the very highest. From what I've got out of this so far, one of the biggest concerns that we've talked about over and over is housing affordability. Based on everything I know living here, we've gone through and so forth, don't see the SDCs are a cause of housing affordability issues. We're here now and that's why we're having this discussion.

We're already at that little slide at the very bottom. I also don't think that SDCs are the solution for future housing affordability solutions. We need to fund our city we need to keep it growing. Three to five years from now, that 8% is not gonna be 8% anymore. It's gonna be back lower.

So by the time we actually give them the break to get up there, probably gonna be about average again. From my perspective, I'm honest I'm just with the parks recommendation. I don't see 7.9, 8.2. If you spread it out over three to five years, don't see that big of a difference. Like I said the SECs I don't think are the solution.

Reality is cannabis is a desirable location and I don't think we shouldn't devalue it by trying to be the cheapest. That kind of just takes the easy way up because then we think, we don't have to do anything else. We need to grow strategically and we need to address specific issues on housing affordability with targeted solutions, not abroad. We hope this takes care of it. That's kinda how I'm after looking at all this information, that's kinda where I'm at.

I'm sticking with the parks records we've putting together in three to five years. That works. I think that keeps the value, it keeps us future proofing because once we get to that seven you know, three to five years out, yeah, it's caps at seven or whatever that is, but then that that it's still on a on whoever the city council is to review that, see if that's still appropriate every two years or whatever the decision is whether we're still there. Yeah. But so that's kind of where I'm at on this.

Oh, sorry. Councilwoman, are you thinking three year phase in or a five year?

I think if we do if we do if we keep the original I mean, there there there's not that much difference. If stick with the parks rec, I would probably go five year, and if we did the next one below, go three year.

Okay. Thank you. Yes. Councilor President Zwick.

I I will concur with councilor Waterman. My concern has been deviating from the parks recommendation because we're looking at yes, we need to figure out a way to target affordable housing, but I don't think this is it. You have a good point where we can't just take a broad brush to it. But with enrollment in schools going down, if we don't have amenities, what's gonna bring families to town? We need to think on the big picture.

How are we going to be stay attractive where we attract young families and get enrollment back up in the schools? And without building things to attract folks here, that that's not gonna happen and we're gonna continue to decline in that arena. I do like the five year phase in, though, so it's just not one fell swoop and we we shock everybody. So I would like to remain with the original parks or board recommendation for projects and do a five year phase in.

Okay. Thank you. Don, you were kind of noodling things here, right? So now you would consider yourself our resident building code expert for our community, yes? Correct. Okay. If Renaissance Home decides to build a

2,800

square foot home versus in 1,500 square foot home is the same size water and sewer pipes that go in and out of those two size homes Is it the same diameter?

I believe they're going to be the same I mean those are those are not huge differentials between those I mean I think when you get down to an ADU it might make a difference but like between a thousand to 1,500 to 3,000 square foot home I think it's the same.

Okay. So really, guess I bring that up somewhat tongue in cheek in that to Councilor Waterman's point and Council President Hensley's like, it's whether you're building a 2,800 square foot home or you're building 1,500 square foot home, it's the same pipe. It's going in and out of the building or out of that house. The usage might be different, which, again, that's captured in other ways and so on and so forth. I know we have figures in terms of like great, know, eight, you know, house means that potentially there's this much park use and car usage, you know, road usage, etcetera.

So that really doesn't impact to the SDC impacting SDCs for trying to create that missing middle housing is not a way to maybe as we look at that down the road. So I guess I'm reemphasizing the point of, what Councilor Waterman was saying about the going with the park plan. It doesn't really going to change the size of houses that will be built.

We haven' shared this tonight but there will be a differential reduction 1,000 to 2,500 square foot will pay slightly less than above 2,500 square feet. That's been our you'll see that revealed. I mean, will be some reduction. Is it enough that someone would make a differential? I can't answer question.

That's really kind of a construction question, but it will be less the way we're intending to tier this with kind of ADUs on the bottom, which are fairly small units, 1,000 to 2,500 and then above 2,500 would be the categories. Now those are again on SDC charges regardless of I mean there's assumptions you're correct on equivalent residential units and the larger the home is the more fixtures it has, etc. Therefore, that's kind of the premise of that. Now, in reality, is there going be more people living in those homes? Can't answer that question, but it has to be based on some sort of formulaic metric.

Thank you. Councilor Maldonado and then I'll come to Councilor Stearns.

Thank you. You know, just to kind of piggyback off of what you had mentioned, Mayor Hodson, and I may have missed it. What does that include for, say, like a you can have a 2,900 square foot home, but what about, like, a duplex that's about that's the same size? It's gonna have more fixtures in it. The main line is the main lines aren't the same size at that point. Does that still are those included in that?

Doctor. The water piece of this is really you can be utility part of that and I don't think they differentiated Councilor Maldonado on that as much as we will be doing on our sewer, storm, parks and transportation because those are city services. I believe that Kemba utility is not differentiated on a home as a home is my understanding. And, they're adopted SDCs.

Thank

you. Yes.

I just want to respond a little bit to what some of the counselors are saying about how, we shouldn't let this, STCs be part of the affordable housing thing. But I'd like to caution that when you have a problem like affordable housing, need to approach it from lots of different aspects. Not one thing is going to solve it. But one thing you really need to watch out for is to make sure one policy doesn't work against another policy. And that's where I'm cautioning.

I see it all the time in my work how a good intention policy actually creates incentives to make the problems worse. And that happens all the time from rent control in Oregon. I had the conversations you got to sell. Can't be a landlord anymore because of the rent control. Or the poverty where you end up with a higher than 100% effective tax rate because of all these anti poverty programs that never ever consulted with each other.

They create these network. So just to respond with what Waterman was saying, what President Hensley was saying. Having this focused on affordable housing won't fix the affordable housing problem, but we'd want to make sure it's not making it worse in combination with other ones. The other thing I just as my own opinion piece on the different plants since everybody was kind of putting in what their opinion on. When I see the Parks Advisory Committee list, What I see is a few very high dollar facilities that will serve a small segment of the city's citizens of Canby.

And the people who joined the Parks and Recs Committee, they are naturally very much pro parks, they're gonna try for whatever they can get. And that's that's that's natural. But they weren't elected by the citizens of Camby. And I talked to to citizens of Camby every day. This time of year, I'm interviewing them all the time.

And I always mention I'm a city councilor. What's their priorities? And I have yet to say anybody saying, you know, I really wish Camby had a $76,000,000 athletic, you know, center or a or a a new aquatic center. Now, I'm sure there's people out there that do want it, but there's not they're not the normal everyday CAMBI citizens, at least not the ones I talk to, which I interview them very carefully. And so as a matter of principle, the very high dollar amount projects, I think, should be taken separately presented to the citizens of Cambia and say, do you really want this?

And maybe pass it via a bond or something to that effect instead of trying to sneak it in to SDCs to make everybody pay for something that is above and beyond what the average citizens of CAMI needs. Now, I'm sure there's a lot of people who want those projects, but I just don't see it as our as as a council. I have I don't have the directive from the people that I represent to start. And I know it's not officially a tax, but I'll call it a tax. Start taxing everybody for a big project that is maybe not everybody is is in favor of.

So that's kind of my opinion on the policy of the matter. But I guess there's six of us so we all can put our opinions.

And, Mayor, from staff's perspective, I'll just flag that this is listed as a continuation of the discussion. We're listening and taking feedback not asking for a vote tonight.

Got you. No, know. That helps.

I figured. I would say what I was thinking.

Councilor Patton, did you have something?

I'm gonna pull a councilor Davis and see if councilor Davis has anything he wants to add.

I don't know if he's still

on there.

Yes. I'm here.

Oh, I thought he was hiding back there.

Hiding.

The hey, Donna, I really appreciate the work that that you've done with the consulting firm on this. And just as remember too that original list from the Park and Rack, that was a brainstorm list. And they the numbers weren't attached when it went to Park and Rack. So don't expect Park and Rec or don't say the Park and Rec. I mean, they were asked to brainstorm notes, and then numbers were put on.

So at this point, anyway, I think that John's presentation is going to be very valuable to the Park and Rec Committee and receive input back from them. That's what will be important to me is where do they What's their flavor? That's what we have in there for us to accept recommendations and ultimately the city council will make the decision. I think that work that has been done to this has been a great job in putting this together and for the Park and Rec Committee, it will show where Camden would land up, especially with the comparables and things like that. Know, so I am anxious to hear what Park and Rec Committee has to say, based on these recommendations.

Councillor Patten.

Yeah. So I just wanna jot something down really quickly here. 330. So, Don, I just want to make sure I have my head wrapped around this correctly. The next slide in the deck that you have up there, if you go back to that yes. Up here, it's showing in the totals where things where things would sit for all of the SDCs. Correct?

It it gives the same comparison, but in a table format. And and so the end game is essentially on if we were to choose

Well, so let me let

me just pause you here.

Yeah. Okay? Because I think we're going down

a rabbit hole. We don't need to go down. If you go back to the other slide deck where it has the the totals for the Pat and Davis Parks plan and stuff on the other one, on slide deck a. I just wanna make sure I have my head wrapped around this correctly. Slide. Coconut. Slide, 10. So down in towards the bottom where it says average new or down where it says total SDCs and it says 53,220 Mhmm. That is that would be the total for the patent plan. Correct?

Correct. Okay. And so likewise, the total for the Davis plan would be 51,330. Correct. Okay. We're tracking. Yes. So now if we could go back to the other one. The way I read this is that the essentially, the Davis plan would yes. That one right there.

The Davis plan would put us right around where Tigard is if we were to just implement it all in one shot. Right? And the Patton plan would put you right above West Linn. Right? So to me, I think I I would be I would if it was me, I would say, okay, Parks folks, here's the deal. For me, I would land on either the Patton plan or the Davis plan. There's not a lot. I would want a little bit more money, and, you know, obviously, it's my thing, so I'm going to advocate for it. But I think that between the two, there's really you're splitting some hairs. So to me, those two make sense.

And that would move us into the higher percentile of municipalities within this area. Now going to Councilor Waterman's point, if we drag this implementation out for too long, we are going to lose anywhere from three to 4% on average every year off of that rollout because of inflation. Right? So to me, I would say that the Patton or the Davis plan would be the best choices with a three year rollout, not a five year rollout. So that way we can lessen the impact of inflation on that fee as it's being rolled out.

Yeah.

And if memory serves me correctly with these SDCs, the actually, I need to make sure that I have my head wrapped around this. The the the developer will pay the SDC amount at the time the ground is broken or at the time their application started through the process and planning? Which one is it?

It's at before the building permit is issued, so it's they've been through land use review for a commercial or industrial development. They will be through the subdivision review process completely, and the subdivision will be built and it'll be at the time that a single family home building permit is issued.

Okay.

We will not issue a building permit unless the SDCs are paid.

Okay. So I guess the other point of this, and this might be an incentive, of act as an incentive for the builders, is that sometimes these builders will build the thing and then they'll drag their feet on their paperwork. And then planning has to go through multiple reviews and all this stuff, and they come back with changes and stuff. In this next three years, the difference between a year is going to make a huge difference in what's going to come at the bottom line. And so it's possible for those three years that we're rolling this out, the developers might actually have a little bit of a fire underneath them to not drag the process out and to actually get it done.

So to me, that's sort of like maybe a hidden bonus to doing the three years full phase out is that people will make their mind up and get it done before the fee goes up from the time. Because, really, the you know, there's gonna be a big difference within a year. So for me, those those are the ones that strike me that strikes me as the best option. My, the patent plan first, the Davis plan second, either one of those, but they but they should be a three year rollout.

Yeah. I I I think I agree with you on that one, counsel Patton, about it being three years and not five. Think we lose a little bit of that momentum with that. Again, STCs, right, it's system development charges, but it's about future capacity. So, you know, when we're talking about these projects or, you know, to your point, councilor Stern, about, you know, a pool complex or whatever, it is not right now.

It's the fees and things are being collected on future development, not on those that are here. Right? So, I mean, to your argument, I think it comes down when the time comes and the voters don't want us. If we go that route and they are like, no. We don't we don't wanna do a a pool bond. That's where I think that comes in, necessarily on the STC side of things. So I anyways, think a three year influx, three year spread is a better option. That's just, I know I don't have a vote, but I just opine on that one. Counselor Sternerson.

This is just, I gotta give my opinion, but the, just a few questions that I hope I think make a better decision. How how and you have a sense of app applications for development and stuff. How many if we do this in over three years, let's say, how many buildings are gonna come in the next year? I mean, are process. How many were we talking about?

And if I say today, wanted to go build triplex on some property, how long is it gonna take me to even get to the point where I can get a building permit? So what are we talking about? We just is the phase in just gonna be rewarding those who's already in process right now? Or is there gonna even be time to because I know some people trying to develop stuff that take two, three, four years sometimes before they can get the thing ready. And I'm not sure if that's just my experience or what

I'd say that it's a combined thing with the land use and then the finance part, which we're not involved with somebody getting a loan to build their property. But typically, it's at least a year from the point they start their pre application process or a year and a half is quick.

So, if we phase it in over three years, basically, unless somebody gets really quick they're going to start and they're going to hit second or the third year of it.

They may. They very well may. We have property that's not been annexed as well that's going to come into the city as well.

That's going to probably not going to come in until after the three year.

It probably will be about the three year period. And so, I mean, I think that's part of that whole dynamic. We don't have a crystal ball. I think part of this is trying to be as equitable as we can as this entry point of the first SDCs come in, I think makes sense to phase them in, think, period, is important. I think we would recommend that they be phased in whether or not we don't have the metrics, but you could have 100 homes as well that would come in the next year as well.

I mean, we don't know that. That would perhaps benefit from year one and there might be a bit of an incentive for people to push that those forward. I think councilor Patton's point, I believe is more about the lingering, like maybe they're between year two and three. They're gonna probably push for year two. I don't disagree with that because that sometimes there is a bit of lingering.

So, the incentive is gonna be so the first year phase in is just gonna benefit those who probably already have projects in development. And the second and third years where people actually have a realistic amount of agency to go one way or the other. So, Okay, that was one. The other question is we're talking about keeping up with inflation. Aren't those SDCs already have some sort of inflationary index into them

already?

They do, but ironically, the inflationary index, the ENR, is not going up. Right now, part is not going up. So we had a huge jump last year, about 12%. And that ENR this year is, right now, it's not going up from what it was before. So inflation from that index is actually now a bit under control or more so than it has been the last several years, which has been going up every year.

So that is an index, but right now it's not going up. In terms of and again we're not asking for a vote tonight but just the direction for and I know councilor Davis was excited about going back to Parks and Rec. Mean we can absolutely provide this back to them. There's a bit of non plurality I'm hearing some consensus on a few items but just it doesn't feel like you guys necessarily have an exact full opinion here tonight in terms of direction to Parks and Rec.

Don't know. I mean, I kind of a mixed there's a mixed bag of how to more like the implementation of it. It seems like, you know

I get I guess for me, then, you know, as a straw poll vote, I would say who's for three years? Who's for a three year phase in and who's for a five year phase in?

I'm for a five year phase in if there's gonna be one because I think that the three year phase in is gonna, yeah, there may not be much as much time knowing how long it sometimes takes to get a development in place. But my opposition currently is more towards the list of items on the project rather than the the the phase in amount. You know?

Okay. So you're councilor Stern's five. Waterman?

I can go five. Five?

We both stated five earlier. I'll stay with five.

Davis? Three or five?

Three.

Three. Maldonado?

I would I would agree with Davis. Three.

Three? I'm gonna go with a three. So now we're

tied. So

what are your thoughts?

Oh, I'm I'm at three year. Okay. Then I guess the next question is are we going back with are we moving forward to Parks plan, or is it the patent plan or the Davis plan or, yes, council president Hensley?

I think I heard that this was I think I heard this was going back to the parks Mhmm. Advisory committee. Mhmm. I would like to make that decision after I hear their notes, after they hear this presentation. If they change their minds, I'd like to hear that first before I decide.

Okay. I would agree.

I'm good

with that.

It's fair. And just a reminder too, this isn't set in stone Right. So

Right.

Three years from now, if, say, if the community says no, then we

change it. You.

Does that help?

That yeah. That's thank you. Because I I that's a bit more clear than, like, what do you guys think? I mean, you've you've given it's I had

a hard time reading

the teenagers I around mean, I really would like to come back and hopefully they're not like, well, what do they think? Know, and so that we're, you know, just again, trying to push it forward to the extent we can.

Well, and I think it's,

I mean, I think it's fair. I mean, even though it's I think it's fair to take back to the parks group too in terms of, I mean, the conversation of three year versus a five year implementation, you know, and then, to counsel President Hensley's comments about all the other dialogue around this, what is gonna come back from them, for us to look at it, we'll we'll say a lot as well.

K. K. So we'll be with Parks and Rec on the seventeenth, and we're gonna come back on March 25, hopefully with conclusionary information from them, a recommendation, and then and then you all can weigh in on that. Then from there, hopefully, we'll be able to just advance the methodology. So thank you for your time tonight. Appreciate it.

Just to be clear, we don't meet on the twenty fifth unless you're wanting us to.

Okay, next special meeting?

It's 04:11

We meet on the seventeenth,

so we'll

be here the eighteenth.

Eighteenth? Okay. The eighteenth. Okay. We can meet on the next night. Is that good?

Yeah. Okay.

The eighteenth? Okay. Not the twenty fifth. As long as

you hit your public hearing.

March March March 18.

Yeah. Okay. Or you can do it April 1.

Mhmm. April.

Public hearing is not until

Yeah. Well, it's gonna be out of it's it's gonna be sixty days after we have the they'll be in the next meeting and then we'll need a couple weeks for the consultant and that'll be sixty days after that. There's a state mandate that we have to do sixty days.

You got

comp plan first then TSP.

So this is probably July 1 is probably where we're at.

That late,

If we well, we if we Trying

to get this done, Don.

If we

have other meetings in June, I'm just I mean, I know the budget thing is huge and, like, I'm trying to hold off on look. I mean, if I'm We can

talk off on

I'm getting yeah. But we can yeah.

You know what, we've been drinking water from a fire hose on this stuff for the last two years.

Why should it change for the rest of So this bring it on, Doug. What do you got? So we'll come back. We probably will see you on the March 18. And if I mean, that would be my preference then. Although it's not a lot of lead time for you all or worst case, the first. April 1.

Yeah. Yeah. Lead time for us to be prepared to have this conversation a third time?

Well, this whatever they come back, hopefully, yeah. We this is what we wanna do instead of a hybrid or something. Yeah.

If we cannot digest what they come back with in a meeting, then we all need to get smacked

Okay.

Cut out.

I got

This horse I I forgot. I I still am yet to get my Camby City Council glue bottle to put up here at at times like this.

It's a horse reference and Okay.

How many times we beat something up?

I can't find a big enough bottle Yeah. That would make Oh, lord. The humorous statement I'm trying to hit.

So, Don, you're good. You'll go back to the I'm good. We've got enough information. Thank you for appreciate the great input. I mean, and it's a complicated topic.

You know, thank you, Don. Great job. A lot of work. Appreciate it. Okay. Done with other business. Mayor's business, item 12. Let's see. Yesterday, I had the privilege of doing the state of the city address at the chamber luncheon. Thank you, councilor Patton and council president Hensley for being there. Plethora of city staff was there, so thank you for that. Appreciate that. Always a good turnout for that. Clackamas County Coordinating Committee is tomorrow. We're actually gonna be meeting at the new Malala Police Department.

So I'm excited to see that building. So that'll be a really good meeting tomorrow night. And then the only other thing to report out on is the regional region one area commission transportation. It is a has a very frustrating committee. It is if all 33 members show up, it makes it worse.

But so ODOT and o c OTC, Oregon Transportation Commission, kind of looking at a different way or a different approach on project development, project listing, allocation of dollars for said projects. And so they've really come back and asked each, regional act to come up with, like, their top list of projects, really trying to keep it to 10. And then, you know, maybe there might be, you know, five alternative ones that are on there. And the whole reason the Region One Act was created was because truly Clackamas County and specifically us, rural Clackamas County wasn't being heard on a lot of transportation issues. And so as we were going through this list, there was a tremendous amount of pushback and it was from mostly Portland members on this act about I two zero five and the expansion of or not to do it.

Again, a ton of conversation about the you can't build your way out of the problem. It's just gonna continue. You build it. It's just gonna get worse and trafficking, etcetera, and whatnot. But it seemed to be anything that wasn't centered around Portland or multimodal that doesn't include cars and whatnot continues to be the push in this group.

And it's frustrating because, you know, I travel like I go to Tigard every day to go to work. And so there isn't a bus route. There isn't a light rail route that goes that way. And so until so when they say that we can't add capacity to build our way out of it for the automobile, I don't see anything on the horizon in terms of what's being built from mass transit to also add capacity. So it's just been it was just a very frustrating two hour meeting just to be from Clackamas County and being bashed on for, you know, wanting to be able to get where we need to go.

Because frankly, lot of people, there was a lot of people on this committee from Clackamas County that live in Clackamas County, but they travel over into Washington County or into Multnomah County to go to work. And so, I get it. You you can't necessarily build your way out of it, but when you've not built adequate roadways since the late seventies, there's a problem. And so I know there's a, again, whole lot going on with the the transportation bill and all that, initiative petition stuff with that and what that's gonna do or not do. So, again, so that we'll really to let everyone know, the big Clackamas County projects are that are on the list.

It is 205, kind of that widening stretch here, which again, whenever they built 205, they did it well enough to plan for it to be widened cause there is road, you know, sides of the road that can be developed. The, 2 3rd Highway 213, as it kinda goes through kind of the southern part of the county and then, the Sunnyside or, was it Sunrise Corridor, phases two and three. So still good projects for Clackamas County, but it was just again, like I said, it was took a lot to just keep them on the list in dealing with those. So that was that got to be my Monday night on that regard. So that's all that I owe.

We got Farmers Market coming up here tomorrow. Right, Jamie? Farmers Market start this month or next month?

April is probably

I think I'm thinking first Thursday. Sorry. First Thursday is Tomorrow,

I was

Sorry, not the farmers market. First Thursday starts work.

Yes. So

there we go. I'll end on a positive note. Can't, you know, the weather's changing and gets into its groove with its activities. So I will go to Councilor Maldonado. Do you

have anything this evening, sir?

Nothing to report. I do want to wish the Canva wrestling team a big good luck tomorrow is their last tournament. It's their home tournament here in town at Ackerman. If you get the chance, swing by, check them out. They're they're they're really a top notch team this year, and then they have regionals this weekend. And then the following weekend, they will be at the state tournament. I also would like to say thank you to Mr. Ealy. We got to meet with Mr. Barrett over at Camby High School, the woodworking and shop.

He did show us the construction house and the amazing things these kids are doing and the resources that they have. It's definitely not the shop that I grew up on. They have laser engravers and three d printers and CAD machines. It's really impressive, and he is doing a phenomenal job with these kids. So I just wanna give him a big shout out as well.

Great. Thank you, sir. Councilor Davis.

Mr. Mayor,

I think he may have left zoom around 08:45.

Okay. So he did leave. Okay.

I just I tried to text him.

Okay. Councilor Patton.

We couldn't we couldn't see him behind me back in his chair. No. Like normal. Sure. So so as far as, my updates go, it's been a busy, few weeks.

I attended the Heritage and Landmark Commission meeting the other night where, there was a presentation about several, properties in Camby, some a business, a church, and several residences that could be considered as historical, historically significant within the city. Of them, two were not and the rest were, which was very which was very interesting. So there was some discussion about that. And then they did also talk about assigning some projects that are coming up. One of the big ones that they do is the cleaning of the headstones and the historic cemeteries and such.

So they're looking to get a grant to cover the cost of the materials and and stuff for that. So they had a very positive, very productive meeting there. A fun one that we that I actually participated into with today with Randy was meeting with the Camby Eco Club for several, what, weeks or a month or so now. They have reached out I think they originally reached out to all the city councilors with an interest in promoting food composting within the city. And I had reached out to them and said that that would be awesome, and I've now gotten looped into that.

So they provided a presentation to myself, Randy, Chris from Canby Disposal, as well as two representatives from Calakmis County waste in their waste department, and they've kinda focus Excellent presentation. They all did a very good job. They spent their lunch doing this, so kudos to them. One of the things that I noticed is when it comes to the sustainability aspect of the group, all of them had their lunches packed in glass containers and reusable containers, so that was super cool. They had some initial thoughts about how this could be done.

There was some sort of the folks around the table sort of shared some more realistic expectations of how something like that could look. And I sort of came up with a crazy idea and ran it by Chris and the folks from Clackamas County as well as Randy. And it's something that we're gonna vet out to see if it's a possibility, but the primary focus is that if it is a possibility, the Eco Club is the ones are gonna spearhead it with the city. I wanna make sure that they get the kudos that they deserve for being part of that. So stay tuned for more information on that.

One of the other things that I did, was kind of odd, was, I was coming back late one night during the boring project that we did the noise variance for up there on Teakwood Circle. And I was coming down 99E, and I was expecting to see a bunch of stuff there, and there was not a bunch of stuff there. And so then I went up into Willow Creek Estates and went up to Teakwood and was just about knocked over. It was lit up as if it was daytime in front of these folks' houses. The noise was not super bad, but this was at 10:30 at night.

So I decided to do a little outreach. And then the next night between seven and 08:00 at night, I went up there and started knocking on doors. I ended up knocking on 12 doors, talked to 11 people in the neighborhood. Needless to say, initially, they were quite bristly about it. But after talking to them and hearing what they had to say and some of the frustrations that they were experiencing in the project, some expectations of what was happening.

I I chatted with Randy, and he reached out to the contractor to assure that it was gonna be done on time. It it ended up working out very well. And there's there's a couple of residents there that we're still following up on with some stuff, but that was one of the things that I think is important about being a city councilor is talking to the people out there and getting a chance to understand what's going on with them. And the only way to do that is to really go to where they're at. And so I was really excited to be able to do that.

And I actually ended up they I ended up sticking around, coming back the next day, and was there when the last truck drove away at around 10:45. In fact, the woman that was in the truck pulled pulled over because she thought I was one of the one of the construction workers that was hanging out. And I'm like, no. No. No. No. I'm I'm I'm on the city council, and then we all headed out. So they got some peace and quiet after that. So that was a lot of fun. Another, I also attended the chamber luncheon where I

heard the

mayor give his state of the city address. It was very good. I did mention that it probably could be pared down a little more in the future because he seems to never get through it all the way, or we need to one of us needs to stand in the back of the room with a with a, you know, a remote or something that would shock him every time he needs to move on to the next slide. So yeah. So that was

I was gonna try to set a new record.

Well, we don't need that. We got plenty of other records we can smash. So anyways but one thing that did surprise me, and I would like to just double check this, was I showed up expecting to pay for my meal because during the budget process, we had talked about that was something that we were we reduced the line item for that sort of stuff by about $10,000 And so I was expecting to pay, and it was actually covered by the city. So I just think and in the budget thing, we need to make sure that that line is not overdrawn because I was under the impression that that was not those meals and those sort of things weren't gonna get covered anymore. So that's just something that's maybe an action item for for city staff.

I also attended the Willamette Falls Landing Heritage Area Coalition. Last night was the grand opening of the where was it? Heritage in Focus, a community curated exhibit. So there's about there was about 30 to 40 people there at historic Westland City Hall. There was about 10 to 15 different installations that have put in been put in by a number of historical organizations.

Some that have a physical presence like the Aurora Colony Museum and others that don't, that now have displays in there. So I would say in the afternoon on Thursdays, Fridays, and Saturdays, I encourage people to go and check that out. One of the groups that was there was the School. As many of you might remember, the Carus School was moved from its current location to a different location, and they are in the process of raising funds to now rehabilitate that building. And they're having a fundraiser, so I think Gordon is gonna bring something up for me now.

Up on the screen, you're gonna see a QR code on April 11 between the doors will open at seven and the show will begin at 07:30. They're having a fundraiser concert by Tony Starlight. So if you are interested in supporting this group, you can scan the QR code here on the screen and it will take you to the ticket website where you can purchase tickets and help support that group. And if you don't wanna go to the concert and you can still support them, they do have a thing on their website if you Google care it's carishistoricschoolhouse,all1word,.org. That takes you to their website. And so with that, I am done.

Great. Before we move on to the next city councilor, it is 09:00. I did not look at the clock sooner. And so I guess this is usually our adjournment time. Is there?

I can be done in two minutes.

Okay. So that day, Daniel.

Shall we extend because

Well, I know it's Randy. Right?

I see administrator needs to do his report, which we've truncated a couple of times the last couple of meetings.

09:30?

Can we extend to 09:30? And if we get done, we get done?

09:30? For 09:15, though.

Okay. Yeah. 09:30

is good. Nine 09:30. Do I see head nods of yes? Yes.

Do have to step away. I do apologize. You what? Yes. I do have to step away. I do apologize.

Alright, sir. Thank you. No whoops for that.

You guys have a good night. Thank you.

So we will extend to 09:30. Council president Hensley, go.

Well, I don't know if you heard me, but happy birthday yesterday, councilor Matanava. I don't have liaison reports yet because it's only the, what, the fourth of the month. But I do want to give you a quick rundown on a few bills that affect the city that I've been following in Salem. Tomorrow's my last day in Salem. Thank goodness. House bill forty thirty seven is an omnibus housing bill that would broaden and clarify, expand some projects and, programs, pass both floors nearly unanimously. So that'll be signed by the governor soon. Two OGEC bills, we were looking at. One simplifies serial meetings law from 2023. They will be changing some definitions and of convening and deliberating.

I'm sure we'll hear more about these things from Emily soon. The other one, exempts food and beverage from the prohibitive use of office statute. So, both of those passed both floors and they've been passed the senate floor today. So those house bills will be signed by the governor soon. One we've been talking about since League of Oregon City, senate bill fifteen ninety three on recreational immunity is still parked in house rules or senate rules.

So I don't know that that's gonna go anywhere in the next four days. Senate Bill fifteen eighty five, that was the one that created caps on project infrastructure, the matching grant thing. That has been moved to rules, which, you know, is where good bills go to die. So transportation package you mentioned that is been moved to May, but it's actually up to the courts at this point. So we'll see what happens on that.

And finally, House Bill forty one thirty four was an increase in the transient lodging tax going from 1.5% to 2.75, but that difference is actually gonna be divided out amongst about 10 wildlife preservation and conservation accounts. That passed the floor today. Really? Uh-huh. So, that that is all I have on the Salem front. I go tomorrow. We're done Sunday. Thank goodness. Finally, lunch and learn. I wanted to tell everybody about the, coalition opioid, awareness coalition has a community partner lunch and learn next Thursday, the twelfth, in the Antonio Ballroom from 11:30 to 1PM.

Lunch is provided. It's a chance to hear about the coalition, what we're doing, how you can be involved, what community partners are doing. We have a couple of speakers. One from, we have officer Wallace from CABPD, chief Dale from, CABFIRE, and some other folks from the school. So if you wanna come learn what that's about and

how you

can be involved, there is a QR code on a flyer. I think Tyler Jamie, did Tyler put that on the website? I know he talked about it yesterday at the

I don't know that.

Okay. Well, if you can't find it on the city website, you can find it on my council president Facebook page or call Tyler and he'll give it to you. So but they do want you to RSVP via the QR code so that they can plan for food. That's the only requirement. That's all I have, mister mayor.

Great. Councilor Stearns.

The Canby Utility Board hasn't met yet this month, so I have nothing to say about that. I just wanna say, actually, thank you, councilor Hensley, for spending time at the state. It's a very difficult thing for me to do with my line of work, and I've tried it before. It's and it's hard to do, so I want to say thank you for doing that.

Of course.

And, I'll defer my other opinions and comments for another time. I'm sure you'll hear them then. Okay.

Anticipation for the next meeting. I like it. Okay. Counselor Waterman. Okay. Great. City administrator of business and staff reports. Mister Ealy.

Thank you, mister mayor, counsel.

I can do this in about ten minutes.

But first handout, this is our look ahead. Keep this fresh. I don't have to walk through everything, but

this is my Yep. Calibrate the calendar

with our schedule. Apologize. Can you hear me now? With your own calendars, work calendars, and otherwise, we are looking to schedule that field trip to the Sherwood YMCA and the Newburgh Shalom Aquatic Center. Have a couple school district personnel going with us, maybe some of our staff, leadership staff, and you all on March 20. Our first stop is 10AM in Sherwood. And then either after lunch or before lunch, we'll hit Newburgh, Salem.

Oops. Okay.

So I think I have a staff report just really briefly to work through this. Tomorrow, I like to thank my human resources director, mister Pete Wood, and his staff, Teresa Spelman, for helping me with the public works first round of interviews tomorrow, March 5. Thank you, Pete. There'll be lockdown with the department with the director leadership team interviewing five five or six finalists for a first round. First part of the quarter here, I was doing some outreach.

I spoke with the Citizens Academy, so thank you, Jamie, as part of the directors that speak to the academy each month. The rotary was next and the Kiwanis and then Don and I will be at the Metro realtors that are meeting at the Camby Police Department where we're gonna learn a little bit from their lands on missed Mayor, I've talked to you about this housing prices in Canby and field questions from them and then ask them ask them questions ourselves. So I will send that invite out to you're all invited to listen in on that discussion. It could be pretty interesting. We have a packet here.

I'd like to thank Maya and her staff for putting together this federal congressional earmark package. Senators Wyden and Merkley and representative Bynum reached out to us and asked if we had any projects that we'd like to put in for. We submitted three, projects totaling close to $5,000,000. So fingers crossed, could take about a year to through through this process, but we are meeting with the staff to pitch our projects. One is the Canbya Area Transit headquarters,

which

is really exciting. A lot of public safety add ons for technology and equipment, and then library, bilingual librarian, and improvements to several rooms in the library for technical works work study opportunities for employment opportunities. Leadership team, my department directors and I are looking to do some volunteer work on a team day at the Cambie Adult Center, so working on that. Pete and I put together an internal hiring committee recently. So any vacancies go through us, our finance director, Denise, and Pete and myself before we post or fill any of those vacant positions just to be prudent leading up into our budget season.

Just for your own radar, November 2026 local measures. It looks like the Canby School District, they're coming to us on the April 1 to talk to you all. Looks like they're going out for levy. Clackamas County Sheriffs are out for a a renewal plus. And then we need to figure out I need to work with you all on the can be swim center. It expires next November, not this coming November. So there's some strategy or some discussion about when we want to put ours on. Is it November? Is it May? Conversation for a different day.

How you've done in the past? I wasn't here. That's $47 per thousand renewal five year levy. Franchise audit. We're working through Barry Ellsner and Nancy Warner to inventory all of our franchises and take a look at the start dates, take a look at the end dates, take a look at those percentages, and see how we're doing, if there might be opportunities there as we audit about half a dozen franchises with the city which go into our general fund and as you asked me to take a look at revenue options this is part of that work spread.

Camden Disposal will be here in your April meeting for their regular review of their rates. Met with Capard leadership was an exciting meeting last night. Their board nice people They just wanna they're doing good things, thinking about Parks and Rec, would love to join in all all the conversations that are going on. They'd love to come and talk with you. I offered that opportunity on what that might look like.

So, I found them to be really need people that care deeply about parks and rec and so another group yet to lean in that you all are very familiar with I'm sure but it was nice to meet with their board for the first time last night over at backstop upstairs And they have done some calculations through Clackamas County and just just so you know, 5¢ because their boundary for Capard is bigger than the city a little bit it's the urban growth boundary actually. It generates a little bit more per thousand. So I put that number in my report for you. We're trying to schedule a subcommittee meeting again on the charter review with you all where we invite can be utility in to talk about Chapter 10 in the charter and where we go from there. They are coming to meet with April 8, we'd like to meet with them before they meet with the full council.

And we are working on helping them install an EV charger behind the theater parking lot, be a level four charger.

Randy, how many chargers? Just one. Just one?

Just one right now. Could be more but this is a beta test with a company called ChargePoint that can be utilities using clean energy fuel dollars to help pay for. Talk about can be school district coming in for an April presentation on their I wanna choose the words carefully here. Their levy, right? Not bond. Levy.

Levy.

Levy. Thank you. Yes. Did, we did tour the construction home. It was pretty cool to see that house. I guess they could build multiple houses out there, so it's kinda cool to see one going up with councilor Maldonado. And then we did the eco club today. Councilor Patton, thank you. Walnut Street, the phase one of that sewer bore is complete. Thanks to Spencer and his folks for helping, monitor that. And Jamie, they put together a neighborhood meeting beforehand, which was very important. We did get some feedback from resident that we are working with proactively. So, thank you for that. Counselor.

One thing I wanna throw out that I forgot was in my conversations with them, some of them were interested in more information about the next steps Yeah. And what that looks like. So I

don't know if you could put

a flyer together about what those are and some timelines just so they may have that. And maybe include a little blurb about what it's doing. The one person did not have any clue why it was even

happening. Mhmm.

And I was complaining towards because of Walnut Street, and she had no clue what that was even about. So if there's, like, a little bit or, like, if there's a thing to send her to the website Yeah. So they can get more information, that'd be great.

I I believe the next phase, Spencer can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's, connecting to the actual sewer line in the street. So I see a nodding Spencer back there. So that's the phase. I'll call it phase two. And, yeah, we can do be proactive with more information. We got our sixth round, Spencer tells me, of comments back from ODOT, and there's 22. We're down from 80. I put that in there on purpose. Spencer, thank you. 80 comments the first time, 74, then 40, now 35.

And so we're getting there. You have faith in us with ODOT, and then we get our permit from the county to begin. This is like number one on our radar, this project. Keep giving you updates as as much as we can. Urban renewal, we sent our letter terminating, to the county and returning the tax increment.

1st Street is being engineered now. Thank you, Jamie, for working on that with Kittleson. And we did get a facade improvement grant for a business on 1st Street that we'll be working through. I gotta meet with councilor Hansley tomorrow on that urban renewal project. And then just a few recent comments from citizens that have come in that were working as staff.

One is a couple citizens have inquired about firework education. Odor from the chicken manure site got pinged on that again today. E bikes on the logging road trail, safety hazards, working with the chief on that. Off leash dogs and barking dogs, and couple, residential complaints coming through. Some of these are coming through counsel. So just so you know, you might see some that you recognize here. And we're working on a hazardous tree on private property with Camby Utility. So that's