City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I'd like to welcome everyone, even us, thank you, to the City Council meeting of Tuesday, July 7th. Call the meeting to order and ask for approval of the agenda. So moved. Second. All in favor? Yes. Okay. Lisa Kerr is on Zoom this evening and Bruce St. Dennis is ill and so And it's going to be here with us tonight. So thank you, everyone. So first, we have consideration of the minutes from the June 2nd and June 9th meetings. And we are going to correct David Carr's job title. And then in the Page 6 of 8, June 9th meeting, we're going to change farmer's market to food pantry throughout that period. And then there are some other typos, but nothing of substance. So with all that said, would anyone like to?

I motion to approve the minutes of June 2nd and June 9th. Second.

Okay. All in favor? Yes. Okay, great, thank you.

Okay. Did you have a change, Lisa, or are you just raising your hand to the group?

I'm raising my hand as an I.

Thank you.

Okay. So we can't see the TV screens down again, Lisa, so we're not going to be able to, on our end, out on the council, we're not going to be able to see you if you raise your hand. It'll be...

Okay. I'll speak then. Okay. Thanks.

Okay. So first on the agenda, we have public comment. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to make public comment of three minutes or less of kind and respectful comment? No? Is there anyone on Zoom?

Yes, I have an ad up in front of Zoom.

Okay. Okay.

Hello, Diana, PO Box 211, Cannon Beach. I'm speaking on behalf of the Friends of the Dunes. Good evening, Mayor and Councilors. I'd like to address the four-dune grading initiative brought by Tim Ramey, Greg Swedenborg, and Elena Greger, and fronted by Tommy Thayer. This initiative is a smokescreen. It is an unfunded mandate requiring the city's taxpayers to pay for lowering and reshaping the dues at public expense for the benefit of a small number of oceanfront property owners seeking better views. While being presented as a public safety measure, the facts do not support this claim. Local fire, police, and lifeguard officials have reported no dune-related accidents or public safety incidents, and the fire district has stated repeatedly that grading the dunes would not improve their emergency response operations. If there is no documented public safety problem, why are we being asked to completely change how our four dunes are managed at significant taxpayer expense? This initiative represents a fundamental departure from the city's current four dune management plan. While its authors say they are not changing the plan, they are. They are replacing a science-based approach with a mandate for ongoing grading based on vague and undefined concepts like hazards, safety, beach access. What this initiative really asked for is a blank check both financially and practically to lower and reshape the dues to meet their preferred standard, which they never clearly defined. That stock stands in sharp contrast to how the current plan was developed. The city spent years creating the 2020 forwarding management plan through scientific study, expert review and extensive public involvement. Dogami, Crest, the Planning Commission, City Council, staff, state agencies, and postal experts all contributed to a process that resulted in a balanced plan designed to protect public safety through preserving the erosion and flood protection benefits of our healthy fordune ecosystem. In contrast, this initiative was not developed through a comparable process. Its authors appear not to have consulted scientists, engineers, city staff, state agencies, or our organization, despite our 12 years of working to bring expert knowledge into our community. The initiative will require the city to take on responsibilities and expense for land it does not own or control. Because the city does not own most of the foredooms, it will require the city to obtain the legal consent of state agencies and private property owners before grading, replanting, monitoring, and maintaining land it does not own, all on taxpayer expense. That would be an unprecedented expansion of the city's responsibilities and financial obligations. Many people would view this as government overreach. Finally, the initiative's language is so vague that even OPRD declined to interpret how it might be implemented. And a judge revised the ballot title to clarify that manage is used in the initiative differently than what voters would assume. He also required that the initiative disclose to the public that they would be paying for this new quote unquote management. This is not a minor policy change to clarify the city's existing responsibilities. It is a major shift away from Oregon's established approach of four dome management based on unsupported claims of public safety and misleading and vague language. I urge you counselors and the public to see through the smokescreen. This initiative uses language of public safety to advance an undefined and unprecedented approach to doom grading. One that would commit the city to significant responsibilities and costs without clear limits or accountability. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. Anybody else? Michelle?

I just want to remind everybody, we're in the middle of cap and the STR, so let's keep that on the agenda. So this is the same method. Okay, thanks. That's us.

Anybody else on Zoom? Or anybody else is on? Okay, thank you very much. So first we have Rescuer 2613. Okay.

Thank you for having me I'm here for the consideration resolution 2613 for the purpose of in the Jordan or in the cities and that the part of what they see in the implementation of the 2 year product program known as we show locals which came to address critical workforce out he needs through voluntary property. All of the citizens in order to read your collaboration. This came before you back in March 2025 with Marcy and Ty Frawick, a placemate, and Alyssa Gertner from Patsy County. And it came before you about the Lease to Locals program, slideshow and everything. You guys went forward with 2515, which was a resolution at the time to go with the county. They were going to go seek a grant and be part of it. County-wide, this is a local effort. The grant fell through, and unfortunately, the other members couldn't go through with it this year. We came and asked you guys, I think, at the retreat, and then after that, if you guys were still interested in pursuing that. And you said, yes, still pursue that. So we worked with Kai. and came back with the budget estimate for a 10-unit pilot program for two years, about $143,000 a year, as you can see in the attachments, and then rewrote the resolution to reflect those changes to just a citywide kind of 10-unit-per-year pilot study. And at least from speaking with the regional council, the folks at the... As for there's still interested interest from class of the story and others and are interested in seeing this program to see more that they will be buying in next but it's I hope we see some success. We can you question.

So the the budget is where you're going to lose the one time 75 or And also that would be a single one that I also said you're going to take out. I don't understand. So so the to your program we're going to set you down by under. We are. And you have the invite me locally. I mean,

I don't think they do that, or they haven't done a, you know, analysis of our local, but they did do the county-wide, and I think, you know, all very similar markets are working to catch up and others that they should provide and have been successful in owning those. I asked them on that, Dan, about the timeline, you know, what we can expect, and she said in the majority they have a A clearly good startup in the usually 78% within whatever that projected 10 or whatever they projected with these kind of startup models. And so successful in the program. So across all of their different jurisdictions, it's usually about 78% valid.

Right. What's that number? I'm sorry. Oh, number what? That said, you're 80% over whatever.

Over that startup, whatever they give to that estimate for that 10-year.

Oh, so potentially 80% over the two-year. Yeah. That's what we're hoping to see.

OK. And if they're still buying, what's their cost?

Just that, you know, the marketing and the administrative cost. That's what we're hoping.

I think that I don't think they're going to be buying.

That's $135,000. $135,000 over two years. Yeah.

I don't think there's going to be, I mean, y'all can try it. I don't think there's going to be buying.

Well, I hope that there's going to be buying because it's going to, I mean, we have to try something.

I agree with that. It's just like the deep restrictions. I think that we're going to be hard pressed to get any, I'm not saying don't try it. I'm just saying I think that the transparency of our constituencies, we might be spending $140,000 on something that, you know, that I think we have to get, I don't think we have to get a dollar. I just want that transparency.

And it's going to be targeting essentially Sand homes, vacant homes.

It is. You know, I would give it just as an example. The home that we first rented when we first moved through was a Portland family, pre-COVID, and, you know, we rented long-term. And then they did, every time we would ask them, you know, they would say that they're hoping to retire here, but they wanted to provide a support. And so I think it's similar to that case. There are those that plan in the next few years to retire, so it's a window that pays that kind of gap difference.

Thank you.

it's just a pilot program right it's a pilot program is what we're agreeing to so we'll see it is yes so i just i'm the cost lisa i think that i and i get it i just that's what i was saying is i just want that transparency that if they're buying them off there's going to be a quick cost and And around, what would you say, around $30,000 or something?

So if we got a full 19 tenants, I guess, is really the 100% target, we'll be spending a little over $11,000 per unit based on all the expenses. So I don't know that there's necessarily a better or cheaper way to add housing units. If we only get 10, it raises the cost to about $17,500 per person or housing. But this is only a city of Cannon Beach program. So, yes, $4,900. Yeah, this year, there's a budget here. Maybe it's just the old slide that says county-wide forecast based on... Yeah, it does. It doesn't say anywhere specifically that it's limited to housing and within the city limits.

Another question, providing it works. When we did the Senate process, and March of 25 was a minute ago. Okay. And that's when we have the full presentation. Do you know how that, I don't recall how that incentive works. It goes down and I don't know. No. Or does that incentive stay the same? It stays the same.

It's kind of the gap difference between what, you know, because it goes up to 150 AMI is what the scary median income rate that they fix it at. And so they're going to pay the difference up to a certain amount. And they cap that with $3,000 something a month. And so what it does is, you know, for instance, if somebody normally is going to make $3,000 on their house, and that AMI goes up to $2,200, they're going to pay that monthly difference.

It's going to bridge that gap. So the homeowner isn't getting... They're not out at any point.

Yeah. Okay. And so that's... I mean, I think it worked with them on kind of getting that gap as... But the homeowner gets the rent. Yeah. Plus this bonus.

Yeah. That's kind of the gap there. And the city pays the administrative.

Yeah. And this 150% of AMI, how would that manage? Just between?

An annual set by, well, set through classic county, by county, which county has a certain NMI.

But who's going to qualify them and manage that? They do. Okay. They do. They do.

It's a whole category.

So the city really doesn't have to worry about that, right? They don't check.

It's more of a turnkey type program, exactly, as opposed to what we'll be talking about in the next 150 days. Right.

I don't know. I have the fear that we're not going to get anything, but I guess we won't know until we try.

Well, I think it's valid as though this incentive bridges the gap between, like, could bridge the gap between what the house payment is and what they can grant it to someone for on a normal person, not the guy coming in for about $30,000 to make a house or whatever. And a lot less work for them. So I think that's a good selling point.

So it opens up a different range of kind of workforce housing as well. We're looking across the whole spectrum. We're looking at terms. the future.

The property owner would still essentially be in charge of anything that needed to be done. Yeah.

I can't remember. Was this limited to new leases and new tenants and properties? Or did landlords say, okay, I'm fairly aware of that? I think so. They never tell something about it, have they?

having to be an open property.

I think they, yeah, I mean, I think that that is referring to someone living in kind of in St. Vincent. So, yeah, I think so, to my understanding, they work with the property owners to.

That's, but that was my, I didn't want to ask you because I thought it was more common. My understanding was that it would, Help incentivize people that are currently renting and renting to continue renting. If they were thinking of getting out of that, aren't they? Yeah. That was not my understanding. That was my bad understanding.

Did I read somewhere that it was only, only for here? Only Crawford knew?

Yeah, I thought that they identified, I thought that they identified vacant properties for second-hand owners first. And I think maybe there might have been something in there to incentivize the landlord that's currently renting to stay in the program. But I think the incentive might have been less. And I could have just been part of that. But in the resolution, the third floor has

says it offers financial incentive incentives to property owners to convert short-term rentals or vacant homes into long-term. Oh yeah.

Thanks for finding that. So it definitely did not include anything about current rentals.

In the resolution that we would be, that we would be upgrading. Yep. Yeah. Somebody else gets the bonus, but I don't. Right. It's okay, because I've done nothing all along.

Right. Yes, Gary, that's true. So you have your first customer, right? Well, we're going to move this thing.

Does Lisa have any questions or comments? No? Okay. I just want to give this a go.

I don't know if I should give it a go. I motion to approve Resolution 2613 for the purpose of planning for and affirming the city's intent to move forward with placement for implementation of a two-year pilot program known as Lease to Locals, which aims to address critical workforce housing needs for voluntary property owner, incentives, and regional property. Second.

Any further discussion? OK. We'll call, please, Jen. Councilor Haynes. Yeah. Councilor Haynes.

Yes.

Council President Burke? Yes.

Councilor Osterhan?

Yes. Mayor Knopf? Yes. Okay. That was it, yeah. Yeah, maybe. Thank you. Thank you, Jeff. Meeting adjourned. Okay, next we're moving to our proclamation session.

I think we're there. We should come sick. Well, it evening that American counselors. This is for consideration of information points as well. We're national night out of this court. That's a lot of answers the relationship between neighbors and law enforcement while bringing back the group sense of community for the more by the great opportunity to bring police neighbors together under positive circumstances. Billions of neighbors take part in National Light Out across thousands of communities from all 50 states, U.S. territories, and military bases worldwide on the first Tuesday in August. Neighborhoods host block gardens, festivals, parades, cookouts, and various other community events with safety demonstrations, seminars, youth events, visits from emergency personnel, exhibits, and much, much more. This year, we're going to be organizing our 11th National Light Out on August 4th, and we hope to see everyone there. We don't have a meeting that night. No, okay.

I move to adopt Proclamation 2612, declaring August 4, 2046, as National Night Out Day in Cannon Beach. Second.

Any further discussion? Okay, we'll call, please. Councilor Hayes. Yes. Council President Kerr.

Yes.

Councilor McSnyder. Yes. Councilor Hannon. Yes. Yeah, yes. Okay, yes, we have a series of action item versus the parks and community services.

Community grant for fiscal year 2627.

All right. Thank you, mayor and counselors. The parks and community services committee presented the recommendations for the 26.7 community grants to the city council on the night work session. They are attached in a and I guess if you have any questions, can be a member of states that volunteer if you have any additional questions. Nothing has changed since

I moved to adopt the FY2026-2027 Community Grant Awards as presented.

Second. Any further discussion? Okay, we'll call for this.

Councilor Hayes?

Yes.

Council President Kerr?

Yes.

Councilor Ostrander?

Yes.

Councilor Hammond? Yes. They're not. Yes. They weren't. Okay.

And once again, I'd like to thank the Parks and Community Services Committee for all the work on a very worthwhile project.

Okay. Next, we have our Cape Calvin Cove Beach Community Club, Incorporated MOU. Good evening, Mayor. Good evening.

All right. All right. So our first one will be the MOU between Archgate Papago Beach Community Club, Inc. and the City of Cana Beach. So the City of Cana Beach and the Archgate Papago Beach Community Club, Inc. have supported each other and worked together in emergency preparedness, response, and recovery efforts over the past several years prior to me taking this position. The proposed Memorandum of Understanding, or MOU, between the City of Canaan Beach and ArchCave Balco Beach Community Club Inc. establishes a cooperative partnership to support emergency preparedness, response, and recovery efforts. The agreement provides both entities with access to a designated facility for emergency operations, community support services, sheltering, training exercises, and other emergency management activities as needed. This partnership expands regional emergency response capabilities, strengthens community resilience, and enhances our coordination between all the local organizations, which will help all the residents and visitors in an emergency in our community. So my recommendation is to approve the MOU between the city and the Orange Cape Mountain Cove Beach Community Club. Do you have any questions in regard to the MOU or any questions or myself or, I don't know, Richard Henry, who is a member of the community.

I move to approve the MOU with Arch Cape, Falcon Cove Beach Community Club, Inc. Second.

Any further discussion? Okay, we'll talk to you again.

Councilor Alexander. Yes. Councilor Hammond. Yes. Councilor Hayes. Yes.

Councilor President Kerr. Yes. Mayor Knopf. Yes. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. And the next is a memorandum of understanding between the city of Cannon Beach and the Cannon Beach Community Church. So a little background, you all know this already, but the generator at the church, it met its life expectancy. It needs to be replaced, and so the church is requesting for the city to pay. And I made a mistake on my staff report that I submitted to y'all. On my staff report in section 2A, not the staff report, but section 2A, it does say that we're going to be paying for half of it, but the cost will not exceed $10,000. So the staff report that I sent to you guys, I just said half. which it's not actually, it's only up to $10,000. So I wanted to clarify that. So it's the motion you've got that doesn't mention that? It's the motion that's got in there that doesn't mention that, but... Yeah, so my recommendation, yeah, I didn't put... And this does say up to $10,000. In the MOU, it does, yes. So you just approved the MOU, you saved up the MOUs for finishing. Yeah, I just made, I didn't include that on our staff report. In our recommendation. But yes, so I've been recommending approval for the MOU and then for paying for up to $10,000 to do the new generator. The new generator is currently going to be installed in the wall, and it'll be completed tomorrow by the church.

I move to approve the MOU in the Cannon Beach Community Church.

I second.

Um, I just have a question. The generator, if the diesel generator matches the type that we have, or the propane, or natural gas, I mean. It's going to be dual.

So it'll be, I believe it'll be natural gas and propane. And so that's what the church wanted to do. They wanted it to be dual, because ours are... Just diesel. Well, they're just regular fuel or propane. Like the double, are you talking about the ones at the PD?

No, the ones for our lift stations. Do we have all of our generators that we have around the county?

Oh, I believe they're diesel. I don't think, like at the pump station? Yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't believe they're dual. I think they're just diesel only generators. And then the new one at DD, but all of the generators that buy cap sites and things like that, the larger ones, they're dual, propane and fuel. Okay. But this new one will be natural gas and propane.

All right. Any other questions? Okay, we'll call the police. Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you guys for your time.

So the next item is Heather on how she can present. That's okay.

Thank you. Yeah, good evening. It's great to see you all in person, mayor and councilors, or most of you. I'm Ashley McGill. I'm the office of the city attorney. I'm presenting this report that Heather in our office prepared. And so, as you all know, the city manager will be retiring in early August, and therefore the city needs to be, again, to the recruitment process for a new city manager's And so they're contracted three recruitment consults and you can see the details that they provided to her in this table here in the analysis and supervision. And so what we are basically looking for is a motion from you all to direct staff to prepare a resolution to enter into a PSA with the firm that the city council wants to proceed with for the recruitment. and so that staff can bring that resolution back to you all on the 14th next week.

Can I ask a question? I don't know if you can hear me. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay. So I was never a member of council when a new city manager was selected. So I'm really unclear about the entire process. Who selects, if this firm were to come up with several different candidates, who ends up selecting those candidates? Selecting the one from the group of candidates who will be our new city manager. Who does that?

So I'm not familiar personally with your personal recruitment process, but typically it is an in-depth procedure. It involves interviews with city officials. It'll also involve potentially interviews with and at least meeting the members of your council, the ultimate selection, I think. The ultimate selection of the council.

Oh, yeah, of the council.

I'm sorry, I can't hear very well. The city council.

It will be a process, detailed interviews, et cetera. And part of the process will be to work with the recruiter to determine what your actual process is going to be, who's going to be involved, et cetera.

And does the council get to weigh in with the recruiter on what particular qualities we're looking for?

Yes, definitely. Yeah, I would imagine that whoever, whatever recruiter you choose, they'll come and provide recommendations to you all. I would imagine they'll express some patience if that's something that you would like and involve you throughout the process.

Okay.

So the thing that I was looking at, the information provided by three recruitment firms, the GME and Jensen, the first one and the third one on the list that provided stuff, Both of those are pretty thorough. This is our process for how we get you to your final candidate. Jamie was a little bit more broad. A general executive officer recruitment is how we generally do things. Jensen, it looks like Jensen is who the city used to get our current city manager. And it seemed like their application reflected that they understand they're applying to So like the city manager, so the various city-oriented thing with meetings for constituents and the community for what the city's looking for, the city manager and stuff. I didn't see very much of that stuff in the problem material that I had when I felt like I was kind of really laughing of the firms that were prevented in the past. The first one and the third one looked like they had pretty good information and said what we could expect to see out of them. but I didn't feel there was that good conciseness of the problem.

That was my impression too. And both GMB and Jensen, they've had a lot of experience with kind of communities. Just in looking over the packets, it's hard because the packets are so similar. The process is so similar with, all the upfront work that they do, I find myself leaning towards the GMP package.

That's kind of where I was too. I felt like Hoffman was more for mid-level employee hiring.

So, sorry, what would If the city, if we were deciding not to go with the firm, what's the process for doing that? Is there a process? If the city chose, if we chose to say, no, we don't want to hire a firm, we don't want to spend $26,000, what would that look like?

You would essentially need to handle recruitment internally. Would that be...

the documents and all that stuff being handled by the city attorneys, or would that be like Tim as the interim? It would likely be a combination.

Yeah. I think we would agree with your input what the qualifications would be, then we would work with the attorneys to make sure that we wouldn't to ask you what the process is, which is essentially what you would do with a firm.

So I would say that these people, that's what they do. They're really experts. And so I would highly advise working with a consultant, despite the cost.

Yeah, and I just want to make sure it's well worth our money. It would be a massive burden on our current staff.

I'm sure Tim could do it.

I don't really want to. No, I was, of the two, I was leaning towards the GMP. Well, ultimately, because I did see a massive difference between GMP and Jensen, aside from the price tag. That was, it looked like their products that they were producing were pretty much similar in reference to the price tag. Yeah, pretty much in line with my gut.

It was something different.

Well, the people that I have to that have used Jensen said they did an excellent job with it and and and we have I mean, they were involved in our last hiring. But I was I was near seaside.

One of the recommendations. Yes. And then the mayor of Gearhart was getting recommended GRBA.

No, that's a city manager.

City manager, yeah.

But Astorios use them when I'm on the Oregon Vaders listserv and when anybody's looking. And there's a lot of city manager openings right now. And they all recommend Jensen. But I'm fine also with Chianti. Mainly because of the difference in price.

I didn't they look like they both have going recommendation. Right.

And then the write up that they had pretty much the same program. And once they can carry through and we we use the week of Oregon cities, and I was not as impressed with with that recruitment processes that was when we had who's gentle

And I agree about GMP over Jensen, mostly again, like Barb said, I like the fact that they're $10,000 less, you know, so.

So direct staff to prepare a resolution to enter into a personal services guardian, what GMP? I'm fine with that direction.

Could we get that under the motion?

Yeah, please. I'll look to direct staff to prepare a resolution to enter into a personal services agreement with GMP to work with the City Council and moving forward with the recruitment. And we will approve that at the July 14th and 26th meeting.

Thank you. Make sure you put a question at the end of that. Okay. Any further discussion?

Okay. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you, Epson. Okay, next on the agenda, we have the Tourism and Arts Commission's recommendations. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Okay, we're ready to introduce you. Okay. I'm the mayor and council at the May 18th, 2026 Tourism and Arts Commission meeting

completed its review of the recommendations for the 26.7 TIF grant awards and they are in New York attachment and Julie Walker is here to answer any questions that you may have.

Michelle is also here. Okay, so that being said, would both of you please come up? Oh, really? Oh, no, no, no.

I'm going to cancel, cancel.

Be careful what you say. Oh, gosh. Okay. Does anyone have questions? I did listen to the entire meeting, especially the discussion over the Chamber of Marketing. All right.

I won't surprise anybody that that's the one that I guess disturbs me the most. A $92,000 ask for something that we had been urging them to do with the agreement we already had with them to do the marketing. And so I was Happy to see that the number was significantly reduced and nobody came close to that number.

But I guess... Did you watch the meeting?

I did not. So maybe there's another, maybe there's an answer to this since I didn't watch the meeting. But what do you do when you've got a $92,000 project, but then you fund it at $18,000? something scalable there. Otherwise, it just kind of feels like we're, yeah, here's what we ought to do something.

So it was a very, I can answer from both perspectives, since I'm also on the children's board and on the marketing committee. So it was an ask that was put together very quickly due to the personnel issues that happened and whatever. And Nan and Edna was brought on to to write it in a hurry. So it was really a two-year ask. Those monies were broken over two years. So we found out that when they came to the meeting to discuss it. So it is issues with the actual application, I guess I would say. You can speak for yourself. And so it was definitely funded at less, mostly because I think there's no way in hell you're going to get all this stuff done in a year. So I think if it goes, a large portion of that money would be spent in the second year when actually privilege is agreed to, video or not, social media or not, how it would be implemented. So, but yeah, it was being down quite a bit.

Going back to my number of things, I said zero because it was an extremely thin application. It wasn't complete, the initial things. There were parts that I'm pretty certain were written with AI because the sentences didn't even make sense. It felt rushed. It felt super rushed. It's just like, try it again next year. Come with the better. There's no examples. There really was that kind of It was an ask for an idea, and it just, I don't know, it just, it wasn't a good presentation. It was bad.

But this was something that, I don't know, the whole program was something Nan was going to coordinate and deliver.

Unless we ended up with a marketing person. But yes, the idea was that Nan would spearhead it. And so she was also the one that wrote it, and it was very, very... I was a little bit about me. So, but I have a lot of respect for him. He's done great work for a lot of other communities too.

Yeah, I agree.

Yes, we do. Well, yeah.

And we're almost done with the contract, by the way. So we'll be bringing that to you probably in August.

Thank you, Tim. I feel like there's really no basis for the yes. And I like Nan really well. But I just don't feel like until they have a solid foundation of what they're going to spend the money on and can come and give us a true example of what that looks like. I just don't think that I don't agree with awarding the grant that you were in on that. in any amount for that, for the stewardship marketing. They get money every year, and there's definitely money that could be spent better than it's being spent now in their budget on this. I think we beat them up pretty bad.

What we want is stewardship marketing. I can't really say that I've seen much that impresses me. And it feels like it's a bigger conversation than just this. We have a contract with them to do marketing. Should we be giving them large grants to do more marketing? I thought the whole idea behind the contract was to kind of a limited amount of bargaining, which we do, and hopefully with my new stewardship marketing. That's it.

Well, the bulk of their following is on Experience Cannon Beach. Right. I'm sorry, the bulk of their following, like on social media and things like that, is through Experience Cannon Beach. And Experience Cannon Beach is actually not maintained by the chamber, it's maintained by a third person.

It's hired by the chamber. Right, it's hired by the chamber. All those are run by us, but somebody else doesn't. You don't have a marketing person on staff.

It's been that way even when there was a marketing person on staff. And so they have the ability to do more stewardship now And that's not being there. So I just, I agree. I don't think that we do anything with this until the chamber can come back with a firm plan on what this looks like and why they need the additional money from what they're currently getting. You know, they, I want to use the term waste locals and that's wrong. What was the round table thing that they were? The sensible. Like, yeah. And we spent a good deal of, the Chamber spent a good deal of money on that.

There was never any outcome.

It just ended and they basically told, I mean, their recommendation was everything we already know. I think that things have been handled haphazardly. Not by I just think that some decisions have been made that probably weren't the best and that has happened kind of year over year.

Well, I did my research too. I called somebody and told them, I was like, oh, who's the man? And they were like, oh, she's a whiz. But that presentation to me was not a whiz work. I know she did the clue. That was just what I was going on. I was like, if I want this in front of anybody, it's going to be me. You know, and Nan's great. Yeah, I hear she's great. Nan is great.

But there's no... Yeah, I mean, we could just approve everything except this. We could... We could ask for... I mean, because the committee did some hard work here, came up with a number. But I still have the question of how do you reduce the budget by 90%? And what does that look like? I feel weird to just kind of throw that money out there and say, issue us what that looks like.

Well, and Julie did say that it was a two-year plan. So then the $92,000 was a two-year plan. The initial part of the plan will take less resources than the actual arrangement. Is that correct? Yes. So that's how they paired that down. But the 92 was just for one year?

No, the 92 was for two years. I would say that the 10, whatever it was, is it 10 or 11? I don't know. It was a lot of numbers that day. It's not based on It was based on the average of everything. So she gave a zero. I gave some. Other people gave some. So it all goes down to an average. So it's not like we were thinking, well, it would be $25,000. And then the rest of it, it's just the average of whatever it agreed to. So it's not really a thing to improve on the two-year process.

But kind of.

But lowering the amount significantly, I think Greg came in at $25,000. And then it just kind of went down, trickled down from there. I will say Fat Tire brought about 60 participants this year. Each participant spends on average $1,000 after they get a room and everything. So there was return to the community on that event, albeit a small return. It was a return.

It seemed like a success. We were lucky because it was mid-week between the two meetings. And I actually looked at the sign-in to see if everybody, and there were a ton of people there. And it's the best sort of turnout I've seen. And it was trying to grow that. Yeah.

Well, and out of all the things that are on here, vampire and stormy weather are by far head and shoulders above every other event on that list for me and Pat. But it was the least that we've seen. If you see that sort of next door, but those two, that tire is, I see people nonstop. Story writer's obviously been a long time event, but I see that a lot. I'm also on that committee.

I get calls from all the chamber people are coming in.

next week to 14, and part of the thing they're going to do, which is part of our new contract, is they're going to show us the two-year marketing slash work plan. So I don't know if that helps inform your decision at all, but they are coming next week.

Would it be possible to take them out of this grant cycle sometime during the year? Certainly. they make, they, if they're out together and make a good presentation to your committee and then we do that as a single grant.

Absolutely. I mean, the good news is that you have the flexibility to do that now. So it's not all just, it's not event-driven like it was necessarily. So yeah, that is definitely possible. I think that would be a

better route to go. Because I don't know what $11,000 does for that particular application. And it basically, like you were saying, throws money away and just disappears. Or it just comes back. I'm sure it looks like we were $20,000, $25,000, and then we had a couple that were smaller and a couple zeros. So I don't know how that happens. I had a comment on mine with the way that we calculate the averages, is this potentially leading to some of these applicants over asking with the anticipation that they're going to get under? I think that's true.

Yeah, I mean, I think that's true if anybody has advice for grants. You ask for more with the holder fitting.

Yeah, most of it, yeah. Please don't screw me up, anybody. She's ready. What? I guess I don't know what that does for the community. Is it a big event?

It's pretty big. I went to it, too. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I was surprised at how many 50 miles away were actually there, because she asks. Raise your hand or whatever. And it was bigger than it was last year. I volunteer for the reception and then I go in and whatever. And it was really well attended. I think it's just a lot of hats and vans. Cool.

I mean, it really nails the arts thing. The arts that, you know, that we don't have anywhere else too.

And it's just some of those events that Tracy... every year is like one of the questions that we ask, could you be self, you know, self-sustaining? And she was like, never. It can't be put on without some help from the city just because of the way it is. And so we all kind of understand that that's one of those ones that probably wouldn't be enough without the money from the city. But because of the arts, because of the kind, it brings a whole different crowd of people to town.

um it's a meal can feel like it's a good it's for the best yeah i know it's been going on for a while i just kind of yeah it's not your game so what do i know you know it's a little probably busy that week right so thank you i have a question about that one and then there's another applicant both in their I wish we might have been a different me. I also did not watch the meeting. So I know that. But both of them indicate that there's a they have the only happens because of path and sponsorships, but neither one of those events list anywhere in their budget sponsorships. Did we're not discussed in the meeting if they had sponsorships that were there and they weren't included in the I know in time for

get lit because Terry comes and doesn't ask for money. Tracy gets paid, but she's not getting paid enough. So there are in-time ones, but that's a good question. I don't know.

Okay. I'm fairly certain that Fatfire mentioned them, but I don't know if they mentioned they're seeking them or they saw them, whatever, but then in Tracy's application or in her review, it mentioned sponsorships, but there were no sponsorships in any budget.

Good point. That's a good catch. I will look into that. The fat tire, I know Daniela is the person who runs that, who's the company. And we haven't pushed them hard on that. We are restrained by what you can do on the beach, as we know, from state parks. Because there was lots of thoughts about, I know what we could do. And it's like, yeah, the state's not going to let you do any of that. So good try. But it doesn't mean we can't do stuff in town. So we pushed her hard to want more people, make it less the whimsy of the weather, and to be able to do that, to get it more self-sustaining by bringing in sponsorship. So we're pushing Nick on that part.

OK. Well, I just think it's because the get lit is $41,000. Substantial chunk of change for less than 100 people. And then that 18,000 for the same amount of people, essentially. Yeah. Substantial difference between events that bring the same number of people in fact. I'm not going to mention it. Let's see what that means. Yeah. Local businesses and all these things.

I don't want to keep beating a dead horse here, but I think this conversation about what we want the Chamber to do is part of a bigger conversation. do we be expecting them to do stewardship marketing as part of the contract? Which is my thought. I mean, to think about throwing $92,000 so they don't have to do stewardship marketing out of the money we already give them is kind of disturbing. But I would say on the social media side, If you look at what Travel Oregon is doing with Facebook, there's no pretty picture posts.

There's no experience, again, beach party picture posts.

Everything is driving people to content. Content specifically, you know, exactly the kind of messages that you want the public to know about us. Everyone on Travel Oregon drives people to content.

I follow travel, but I haven't, they don't identify my feet very often. So what would you suggest?

It's always engagement.

We post, I mean, you said this before, Lisa was listening somewhere. Last year when she was like, well, it's too bad that only 127 people like the post about the elk, and yet 20,000 people like the pretty picture of the sunset. It's like, welcome to social media. Yeah. You want engagement, but you also want to be doing that stewardship stuff on there. It's just not going to be as engaging because people are not going to love that.

Especially if that's not paid.

Yes.

And actually getting the message that you want to get out there. Otherwise, we're just kind of opening the door and saying, if you like a pretty place, here we are. And at least this is kind of qualifying more of the people that we

are seeking to come here and just because you don't get a like doesn't mean you didn't get a whole bunch of views and those views can still just people are still reading things if they're viewing and they're clicking but they're not liking that's okay there's engagement is also the clicking so right but it's not like but it's not like so um i think it you almost can't look at likes and you have to look at views.

Well, it's the reporting back on the views as well. It's not just the clicks that come back, but the actual views that it asserts to you and the stewardship messaging gets served to less people for algorithmic reasons. Right, for all the algorithms.

Yeah, I don't think it's stewardship. Stewardship and marketing as pretty picture of an elk and then say, and keep your distance from them. There's just a lot more to it than that. So anyway, I'll stop beating the horse.

So was the consensus to ask the chamber stewardship be removed from this round and kind of reevaluate and see if the chamber represents I don't think that actually has the actionable items in it. And then see what that looks like. And that would probably happen after you have a discussion with the Chamber. Is that about the... That's what I would have to do.

We'll have to happen after the next meeting because we don't have Jim here. So we'll just do four more. Please don't hit Laura with these horrible things.

I don't know. None of us know. I mean, sometime during sometime later. Yes. Yeah. You don't vote on this.

Yes. So we're moving. You're moving. Of course, that's the change. Yeah.

Stewardship. Everybody okay with that?

I'm fine with that.

Yeah, I just think it's a conversation we should have whether we want to be adding more money to that, to the conversation.

Right. And I think that, yeah, it's going to be seven months.

I agree. I have to say I missed a lot of the conversation because I can't hear some people very well. But, you know, I'm trying my best and I'll go along with the consensus on this.

Is there any other concerns that anybody has? Concerns or questions? No. Lisa, do you have any other concerns?

No, I guess I was along the lines of not awarding them, not awarding the council anything for the stewardship marketing. That seemed to make sense to me rather than just sort of throwing some money at them. To me, $18,000 is a lot of money. You know, so I just... $11,000? 11,000, yeah. It's just that I look at other groups like the Clatsop County Cultural Coalition. They have a total budget of $25,000 for 20 arts groups applying from all over the county. So this is really, really a generous program. And I think it's wonderful that we're able to do it. But I also think we shouldn't just... give people money because, you know, giving them less when they asked more, I think, you know, I would, I probably would have agreed with the no dollars on that if the application wasn't well filled out. And if it didn't make any sense, that would really bother me. But, you know, I'm willing to go along. I think I probably missed part of the conversation because I can't hear it.

You can go back and watch it on YouTube. I can.

And it's scintillating, so I probably will.

Thank you. Well, and we have talked a lot over the past two years about what Druids and the Narched Island looks like. And there's this whole, mostly events I have a plea in that having some things that crossover into marketing. But then we talked about the destination developer kinds of things. Is there an update on that? Or is that time for a conversation on what that looks like again?

I'm trying to think if we've had conversations about that, past loan events, which were given to us.

not sure i mean the way the dollars are going it's a pretty nice uh a pretty nice environment and i think you know we've expressed a lot of interest in having these kind of uh destination improvement kinds of projects that would qualify for the tourism dollars kind of like a assignment represents the community

I mean it matters are going to come in the night and put signs up at the beginning.

So some of the cars are going to be all the laws here. Over there are parking or trails or there's all kinds of things that can be. So I'm just kind of wondering. You know where this is going one of the next.

That's the thing about the budget process was, so we'll have the agreement, essentially have the agreement with the chamber that you'll approve. So we have the hard number. We'll know what the place is for, or the costs are going to be for what we've designed for NACoS. And we're going to combine all of the tourism and arts funds into essentially one fund with the individual line. I don't know if there's money, so then they can use that to however, you know, for your trails or so there's not the different pieces that we've kind of got here. So the intention was that we would bring that kind of back in the fall and then 27, right, 27, 28 budget is when we would essentially implement that. And there's a plan to hire? There is a plan to hire. We've gone through the job description process. We just have to post it. So we'll have a TRT coordinator. And then that person will help with the cap funds and chamber and et cetera. So that person will help guide this. Whatever program they come out with.

I mean, they may not help develop it and then they will be managing. That's our intention.

I mean, so part of it is on the destination development. I've been sitting here thinking about it. So there isn't a plan for the school yet.

But there will be.

Right. In addition, it's not necessarily our job to come up with the ideas. It's also the job of the public to come and say, what about this? We've had some of that and some just don't make sense or the answer is no because it doesn't fit within the jurors and that kind of stuff. That's all fine. But part of it is people need to come and give us suggestions. I've heard suggestions of, what about we cover the tennis courts? Stuff I wouldn't necessarily think of. kid stuff, like all that stuff. What do I know about kids? It's like, oh, we could make our kid thing better. It's like, bring it to us. I mean, yes, we can come up with ideas too, but if you have an idea for a specific crowd, then you should come and talk to us.

I would like to talk about parks. Maybe they come up with ideas on those kinds of things. Maybe that

Do they know that? I don't know.

I've said it a few times and we actually put more money in their budget this year to hopefully end up making And right now they're looking over the match of when and taking things out that could never happen and discussing things that could happen. I think they know. I did a presentation at your parks last year for a new

destination playground, but I don't think it's very different.

But we've talked to them about, and of course that thing happened with them, but they haven't come to talk to us about any of those stuff, because I could see us working very closely with parks on lots of these things.

I don't know if there's any accounts, other than parks is the one that kind of makes sense to me, but I mean, is there something else that? No, I think that's the right direction.

When the city came to us for the restrooms and fire came to us for the, you know, the lights are down. Yeah. So there are people coming.

Right. And I think if you're having your meetings once a month, I think that helps.

So how do people come to TAP with a suggestion and a solution?

possible solution or you know can we work on this or talk about it and then you know the people who came with the idea of the mother thing or whatever that was yeah that was it um that was just but they will apply for oh yeah yeah that was another idea that came fast and so they were just like what can we apply for and they could just miss the community grant yeah so yeah but i mean so you know it's nine o'clock every third monday i think yeah so it's like

So the city asking for money for the restroom was kind of just an inside deal. Well, it was.

Because of the way it happened. Because I had a drink with Karen one night.

The lifeguard, did they do some kind of formal request? Right now, there's not an official process that somebody would go through to submit a

other than to come to the meeting and suggest it. And we have public comments, right?

Jennifer, is there a form?

No, we did not do a form. Because we wanted to, because that would be another document. We've been inviting people to come. Gary did that flyer. Give us your suggestions and your input.

We have a public comment at the beginning of every meeting. And that's something we've talked about. The focus has been kind of on art and some other things right now, but those other research and other options. You guys talked about doing a survey outside of art. That's right.

About what people want to see, where they want to spend money. So there's been a lot of ideas thrown around. I think that ended up in the community bullet room. Something about hand reach. Oh, yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. So back to the grants. Yes. Any other questions?

We're going to come back to this for approval without the chamber of marketing.

Well, we'll come back as is and you're going to make a motion to not approve. Okay.

Okay. So thank you very much again. You're Well, it takes a long time to bring all of those up. So we do appreciate your efforts.

Thank you.

Okay, that's on the agenda. We have wildlife.

Council requested staff work with the city attorney about wildlife protection language. That was presented on June 9th work session. So we've gone back and made some changes. So attachment page provides the revised draft language based on input from the meeting.

I just want to say that I think that it's a great job of a very simple fix actually for the harassment issue. And I think it's well done. I really like it.

So I had a couple of comments. In the, probably in the whereas, as I would imagine, the first instance of referencing elk, so I guess this would be the third whereas, I think we should use the full name of the species, Roosevelt elk, and then hereafter refer to that elk. Josh Triplett- That's good. Josh Triplett- I think that's the first instance. Josh Triplett- And then in that next whereas has four bullet points which are actually just two bullet points copy and pasted so probably just remove the third and fourth bullet point. Josh Triplett- And then Josh Triplett- Which Whereas, uh, regulated content sentence again. Oh yeah. So in that, in that same one, uh, where I'm going to be habituated, um, I, uh, humans and ultimately aggressive towards them. I don't think ultimately aggressive, um, is. accurate i think ultimately increases the chances of aggressive behavior and a higher potential for human health conflict should be the the phrasing on that where are you eric i can't i uh if the first bullet points under the fourth whereas ongoing and regular encounters with health will cause them to become habituated and ultimately aggressive towards humans i think that it would be inaccurate to just make the assumption that they will become ultimately aggressive, but I think it should be raised instead and ultimately increases chances of aggressive behavior and or a higher potential for human health problems. I feel like that's a little bit more accurate than the potential danger that we have there.

I like that. That's good.

And then the other substantive comment that i had was i agree with lisa i think that uh with clarification on what harassment means is great but i i think we still need to have that within 100 feet of elk in there so in that uh 614 one um to ensure the safety of both health and human life you know the person should not willfully approach to within 100 feet of an elk located within the sea limits and just meet that 100 feet in there. That way there's a number that our information aides can point to. There's a number that our officers can mention. There's a number that we can market as something that's part of our marketing material that 100 feet is the recommended distance to where Oregon says 100 feet. And so it's still within that no person shall globally approach to within 100 feet of an elk as opposed to the elk approaching to a person within a hundred feet.

And then it says willfully, so that takes out the issue that was raised about accidentally walking around a corner and finding yourself 25 feet from an elk. That's not... Yeah.

And then I had some questions, but those were the seven changes that I had in here.

So in that fourth warehouse where the two bullet points are repeated, it does say up above that it came from the F&W website. Is there two more bullets that should have gone there and just kind of

This is from your prior signature, so I'm not sure. I can check for you. I would assume that it was just two. Okay. Yeah, she drafted these, the whereabouts like this.

So, or did you have other corrections?

No, no, no. I just had a comment or question. So, I received a video about a helicopter from a couple of different people who was right here in the city park. And in the back of the video, there's an information name right in the past, whether it's the dog jumping at an elk, and the elk attacking the dog, and people running around and kicking a soccer ball around. And I just wanted to check if the information has gotten the flyers and all of the information to be able to get stuff out yet. We're waiting for you to include this. OK. All right. And then the plan is that they will have a wire and they're going to carry with them to be like, hey, this is.

All right.

Do they do the information aids have a pretty direct line of contact with the department? Do they have like radio? Yes, they do. With you guys. I thought that they did. I just confirmed. So they could call for backup if they need to. Correct. Yeah.

Anything else?

No, I think Eric's changes made a lot of sense to me. And I'm happy with this. I'm glad we're doing it.

So on the way of these numbers and kind of funky, 614, the second number too, the severability, I'm assuming that maybe that's supposed to be like an A and then a B too. and the numbers kind of seem a little screwy on us, but I'm not super clear on legalese. Is that kind of the language that I was asking for, that like the notwithstanding city, or notwithstanding state and federal laws, this doesn't override those? So when somebody has a permit for raising that severability language is what protects them from still completing what the state has told them they're allowed to do?

Not exactly. That link, well, sort of. This language is common in all ordinances, just essentially to say if any language in the ordinance is found to be invalid, the rest of it stays rather than just throwing the baby out with the bathwater. But I read when you asked your question about that, I think it was already heard. I think it's perhaps covered in section three of the new chapter. And as far as the numbers go, that is a little confusing, but the Section one shows the amendments section one of the ordinance shows the amendments to the chapter 614 and then section two and section three are all within this ordinance, whereas Numbers one through four with the parentheses are the amendments to the actual chapter itself in the code, if that makes any sense.

Okay, so the with the parentheses is the one that accomplishes the goal that I asked for. Correct.

Is there any timing with this?

Does that not go either? It does. It's in parentheses number four.

I wish their references are classic violation, but then they are correct. That's over the doors. Okay, that's actually a number are going to happen.

So, well, about this, that next meeting, your office is very close in person.

You can also adopt that amended. If you adopt unanimously, but you don't need to do that. I didn't.

Why is this one posted that it wasn't posted by the ordinance number or anything?

Oh, right.

Forget that discussion.

No worries.

Okay. Ready to move on? Okay, so next we have the monthly status report. Anybody got any questions? No? Lisa, any questions?

On the status report, no.

Okay. Okay. Am I yelling? No.

I sound like I'm yelling to me.

No, no, we wouldn't let you know. Okay. Okay. I have nothing for major communications. Anybody have anything for counselor communications?

I apologize. I just, I trapped, this is going back to our prior conversation about this ordinance. Do you mind if I bring up another topic about that? Sure. We had discussed in the fourth whereas clause, the bullet points, and we were asking whether there were other bullet points to add. And I think I tracked down perhaps the site, the ODFW site that the prior city attorney had been looking at. And I did find other bullet points. So for your next subsequent ordinance that comes before you, I will add those as well for your review. Okay. Just wanted to put that briefly.

So there is a total of four. It's just two of them got deprecated.

There's a total of six.

Oh, great.

So... So we put this on the 14th agenda so that it can be posted before the 6th?

I would suggest putting it back on the 6th. You're working on it. Okay. And this way, we'll put the new whereas, the bullet points that Ashley referenced, and then we can always amend them in the 9-5 and have it posted for seven days. Okay. It's a twice-by-total, and we can make amendments to that. Okay.

Okay. Okay. Okay. Good in the order. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Well, so I received, man, the bulletin came out, and I received a couple of emails about FL10.

And I just got them today, and I really wanted them posted with the packet, so I'll send those to you, Jen, so they can be actually posted with the next packet. But there's just a lot of people that are really happy and hearing it more and more from other people. So I guess mainly I just want them to know that their, their emails where I did receive their emails and they will be forwarded along. So we can read them and possibly just have a little discussion. Okay.

Lisa, do you have anything for talks or communications?

Oh, no, it was good to the order.

Okay. Okay, so we're ready to move on. We're good in the order? Go ahead, Lisa.

Oh, I just, I wanted to ask, and this is, maybe you can refresh my memory. At one time, we talked about a vacancy tax as one of the tools in the package of trying to, you know, encourage more housing in the city. Whatever happened to that? Did we just scrap it or is it still on the table? I know that some communities do it, so I know it is legal if it's done properly. So I'm just not clear if we just let that fall by the wayside or not.

My memory of that, we had a couple of joint sessions when I was on planning commission stuff. And it was presented as kind of like an administrative nightmare for staff. And there was a lot of controversy with it. So it was like a combination of administration being kind of crazy and that. So I feel like that's kind of where it just dropped at.

And at that point, there were so many lawsuits from communities.

And I don't know if that's improved or not. I think our story is moving forward with getting something on the November ballot, I think. I think that's what I'm understanding. Are they going to do that? I think so. I think there's a citizen's initiative or something going forward up there in Astoria or something related to that. I saw a thing on Facebook today about it.

They've boarded it in a way where it doesn't sound as though it's a vacancy tax.

There's other names for it. There's other names for it, I know.

Yeah, but I think that, I mean, I personally... think that we've got a law on our plate just working on housing without adding something else to dock it for the time being. And it sounds like planning wasn't real interested in.

And at that time, that's kind of like been out of, I feel like it was kind of like a two-fold thing, administration and then the controversies with whether or not it was legally defensible.

I think that's changed, Eric. I think that the legal defensibility has changed since we had that conversation, that more jurisdictions have been doing it. I know New York is doing it, New York City. But I just wondered, because I'm not saying that to take on a whole new project, to me it was just one, another stick in the bundle of housing issues. In other words, since second homes that are vacant are probably one of the biggest impediments to having more housing, just having all these homes standing vacant, that I just thought it may be something we want to revisit at some time as another way to address the housing issue. I've had people worry about it quite a bit, where it went.

Lisa, can you hear me okay?

Yeah. So what would you, what would the vacancy tax do? Would it go into a housing fund?

Yes, exactly. In other words, that that's the whole idea is the money from the vacancy tax would go into, into, um, providing housing or towards incentivizing people to build middle housing and workforce housing. So I mean, you know, some jurisdictions are doing it. A while back when we first talked about it, it was like brand new. They were doing it in Vancouver, British Columbia, and it was like a big to-do and there was all kinds of lawsuits and that seems to have settled down. and New York City is thinking of doing it and other jurisdictions across the country. So I thought maybe we want to wait, still wait a while to think about it till we're sure that the legality has been resolved or there's a way to resolve it. And just because there isn't another state doesn't mean it would be legal in Oregon, you know, because we have our own state laws, but I think it's something that we should keep in the back of our minds as another tool for providing housing as it becomes more acceptable.

Maybe the lease to local company can go after some of those vacant houses and approach them about renting, leasing to local people.

Well, not that they'll do, right? I'm not going to get first.

It's just kind of another Hammer mode. Now you're not going to get incentivized to rent. You're going to get penalized to not own anything for it.

Well, and I've talked with people about that too. And a lot of people that have second homes are like, I'll take on the extra little burden because it's really not a lot to them. They would rather do that than be a landlord. I don't like to think of it as a landlord. Sometimes it's always proper to be a landlord. But finding out the legalities, I think it's good idea to keep it in the conversation and finding out which way who wants all of those legalities.

How much of a hassle will end up being? And I agree with Deanna actually about, I just, I mean, I hope I'm surprised and I might be pleasantly surprised, but I will be really surprised if the lease to local produces much second housing, but we'll see, you know, I just don't think... People who have second homes, you know, a lot of them have artwork in their homes. They have sculpture. They have all these, you know, I mean, I just don't know if they're going to want to lease those homes to on a long-term basis. And then they can't use them. They can't come down for their two weeks of the year that they use the home because it will be leased. So I don't know. We'll see though. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe, maybe it'll be a smashing success and I hope it will.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- Okay, so we will keep it in the back of our minds, the vacancy tax. HAB-Michael Leccese & So.

HAB-Michael Leccese & For for good you're right, I have a question for for staff, but part of the account stripping I think it looks great it's done something I had a lot of comments from people that were. HAB-Michael Leccese & Making it specifically just to be native and they told that. Josh Triplett- About it. They were like, well, I didn't. I don't like it, but I'm just going to change. I think that was a comment that I got from a handful of people Josh Triplett- They're being completely honest, but I did have a question there. It seems I I assume there was some handful of people brought apart. And that's why some spots didn't get marked. There's a few. There's a few places that Josh Triplett- There's just like a mistake and missing TV and summary response and then it kind of seems like there's possibly the rigid adherence to the 22 feet that we discussed that may have eliminated some of the T's that could exist in some places that don't. Maybe because we've said 22 feet makes sense, but then there's a few in front of Gary's old shop. It doesn't have L's. I'm assuming it's probably 20 feet or something. So they just didn't mark it. The contractors are probably given 20 feet, make it so. So I think maybe whenever they're coming through and doing adjustments or something, it seems like there's a few things that were missed. And I'm getting some adjustments that can be made adding a couple of spots that are safe parking spaces. We just give them that very much. We'll talk to Chris and have him write something about that. I think it looks great. It seems to have alleviated some issues of people doing some weird stuff. But I've seen it so far. Yeah. I used to see cars actually parked in there. Yeah. Actually, I've also seen people taking up two of them. Yeah. But it seems like it's pretty clear when you drive, you're going to kind of know. Right. Oh, there's a spot on the head. People are often able to wait it out. And we take it to the heart.

What? And take it.

We had about five to seven days where we did not get warnings just to kind of get that, especially the locals getting used to the striking. But as of last Friday, that warning was off and it would be a certain break or so. We do have some spots where the company striked where they shouldn't strike, like There's a sign down at 1st and Spruce. There's no parking here in the corner, but they put a maybe. So, I mean, we've made a ditch to those that public works. So, we're not getting people into those situations where the parking really shouldn't be fixed.

And the parking, the tees that are out by the post office need to be fixed. That's like the fifth time they've brought it up. They need to be fixed. The back one goes into the approach for American market. And it doesn't go all the way up to the other line. So they just got off when they put them on there. When somebody, yeah, somebody's car got flipped the other day because they were parked. And then somebody hit that point.

Yeah. Yeah.

No, no, no.

I agree. Okay. Anything else for going to be ordered? No. Okay. Thank you.

Bye. Thank you. Thank you, Jen and Rusty for helping me be on this.