Board of County Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Well, good morning, everyone. I will now call to order the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners Business Meeting on July 23rd, 2026. County Administrator Gary Smith, will you please call the roll?

Yes, thank you, Chair. First, our staff support today, County Council, Billy Williams, Clerk to the Board, Andrew Jirabi. Roll call, Commissioner Schroeder. Here. Commissioner Helm.

Here.

Commissioner Savas. Present. Chair Roberts.

Here. Okay, before we go to the Pledge of Allegiance, I'd like to turn to County Administrator to explain some agenda changes.

Yes, thank you. With the Chair's approval, we are removing item 4B. This was a board discussion item, Public Safety Levy Research and Next Steps. just rescheduling to next Tuesday July 28th at 10 a.m. during your issues discussion so removing from today just bumping to next Tuesday chairs approve that we've noticed it online just announcing that for you this morning all right thank you so if you'd now please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance

First up is public communication, and testimony is limited to three minutes per person. As always, I ask comments to be respectful and courteous. As a reminder, you can also email submissions for public communication at bcc.clackamas.us, and they'll be accepted as a part of our public record. We'll start with in-person testimony first, and I'll turn to our clerk to help us moderate the in-person and virtual testimony.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a reminder that if you are attending this meeting in person and wish to comment during general public communication, please fill out a blue card and deposit in the box that can be found by the center doors. I will call your cards in the order they are received. When I call your name, please come forward. Remember to introduce yourself. You will have three minutes. First, Michael Jensen. I apologize if I've misread that. Michael Jensen, please come forward. You'll have three minutes.

That's correct. There are three of us in the world that have that spelling. Good morning. My name is Michael Jensen, and my wife, Jo, and I live in a small pocket neighborhood in unincorporated Clackamas County. We're here as homeowners who paid hundreds of thousands in property taxes to Clackamas County over the past three decades, yet feel ignored by our representatives. With limited time to share our experience, we have firsthand insight into the impact of the county and state's push to build more homes and the impact on existing neighborhoods and residents. Our immediate neighborhood is a community made up of generations of seniors, home remote workers, and young families, and we are all feeling the impacts acutely. Personally, we live next to a two-acre plot that was largely clear-cut to accommodate three large homes right up to our property line, one nearly twice the square footage of the average neighborhood home. In the past four months, we have been subjected to onslaughts of daily construction noise from as early as 6.30 a.m. and after 7, and on Saturdays. It has been extremely stressful for us and everyone around. We've had to deal with decibels as high as 110 from tree cutting, grinding, utility pole drilling, street cutting, countless vehicles crowding our small neighborhood street, blocking our mailbox, property access, idling gravel trucks and cement trucks, generators, saws, nail guns, and more. all of this for hours on end. The noise and congestion has been extremely stressful, and the lack of planning and scheduling information has left us all at the mercy of the developer. One of our neighbors was so concerned about the risk to the children who were playing right in the streets, put their helm up for sale and moved. To manage the noise, we were forced to buy new windows and can rarely open our other windows to let the fresh air in. And I don't need to remind you, it's summer. Now we will deal in the fall. We will need to deal with stormwater runoff that the force they clear cut help mitigate the pools of water that otherwise accumulated on our property. Now we will deal with all of the polluted stormwater from three streets because the only stormwater drain drains to our property. The county code enforcement operates as a pass the buck operation. We are on our own to deal with and consider owner and his workers telling us that they can do whatever they want and make as much noise as they want because it is a construction zone. It is not, it is our neighborhood. With the push for more housing, this is happening all over our county. But what is different than in the past is that property taxpayers had no access to hearings and scheduling information that would help us manage our lives during this project. Instead, we are told to just deal with it. This sure makes this process look like taxation without representation. We are here to ask for you to form a work group to address and help create fair policies that protect all citizens, not just the developers building expensive homes. Thank you. Thank you. So, do you have any questions? Or is there any opportunity to address this issue further outside of this meeting?

Yeah. Commissioner Savas, go ahead. Well, I think that, first of all, this is your chance to bring your issue forward. It's really not a chance to kind of have a discussion, but we'd like to learn more about it. We can make sure we have staff get your contact information, and we will follow up at another point in time. Commissioner Savas, do you have something you want to add to that?

Yeah. experienced these kinds of complaints, and recently the state law changed and basically disallows us from even notifying people beyond 100 feet, where it used to be 300 feet. It used to be that we could do more than that. We could notify people beyond 300 feet. State law says now you cannot... do more than 100 feet notice. So that's just one implication of the state pressure on housing. So if your contact information includes your phone number and your address, great. I'll reach out to you and at least see from a noise standpoint if they're abiding by our ordinances on the noise piece and anything else. But I've I understand. I've experienced that myself several times. So you're not alone.

Yeah. At the local level, this is where we need to start pushing back because I don't think it's going to occur at the state level. Right.

One last comment by Martha before we move on.

Yeah. I don't want you to give me your address, but about where is your neighborhood? You said it's an older neighborhood and it's being densified.

It's actually off of Pinehurst.

Okay. Okay.

Up near, it's a dead-end street. We're on a loop street that's also, basically, it loops back down to Pinehurst. And there's a lot of trees, green spaces that, fewer now, that the neighbors loved. We had deer and owls and critters, and it was just lovely. Yeah.

All right. Thank you very much.

Thanks for coming in, and I agree with Commissioner Savas. Part of this is puts the onus on counties to implement something that hasn't been necessarily our policy. So we will look into it for you.

All right.

Thank you both very much for coming. Thank you. This is a final call. If you're attending this meeting in person and wish to comment during general public communication and have not yet had the chance to do so, please fill out a blue card and deposit in the box found by the center doors. Seeing none, Mr. Chair, with your assent, I'll move to those attending this meeting virtually. If you're attending this meeting virtually and wish to comment during general public communication, this is your opportunity to please raise your hand, and I will call on you in the order that I see. Mr. Poole, Mr. Les Poole, I'll unmute you. Please introduce yourself. You'll have three minutes.

Good morning. Les Poole, a longtime property owner and former resident of the Oak Grove area, which is where the previous speaker was referring to. I know the exact street he's on, and I would advise him and others that are concerned to look closely closer at Metro's influence and control of planning and density mandates, uh, because Metro really is, uh, the biggest authority in terms of policy and what we're seeing. And, uh, certainly, uh, we're going to have growth. We're going to lose trees. We're going to live in a higher density world, but, uh, the extremes we're seeing are unacceptable and, uh, I've commented before about the awkwardness of legislators, many of whom are not land use or property specialists and shouldn't be expected to be. Those folks are being asked and driven to pass policies that, well, let's just say are over the top. The subject that I wanted to talk about briefly and just ask about is a big construction project. It does have big impacts and there's a lot of neighborhood concern about it. Um, but it's not a residential, I'm referring to the, uh, recovery center that will be built there in, uh, near the Clackamas post office in the oldest story, Clackamas neighborhood, and, uh, not opposed to it, but concerned about the demolition of the school. and the construction noise and impacts and some of the things that were mentioned coincidentally earlier. The neighbors are restless about some of the lack of specifics as far as, you know, how parking and noise and other things are going to affect them. And I'm an advocate for neighborhood involvement and awareness. And I'm just here to deliver those concerns again. And And to make one last plea for some type of preservation honoring the school, we've requested that maybe the front foyer or the doors or, you know, some feature of the school, the sign for Clackamas School, maybe there's some aspect inside the building, but some piece of that property needs to be preserved. thousands and thousands of folks have gone through those doors. And while the school's being torn down for a viable purpose, honoring that school and that history in some small way is a very, very minor request. And so far, I and others have been stonewalled. So I believe that Commissioner West is the liaison and I will email him one last time and hopefully something can be done just to preserve a piece of that property and the peace of mind of the businesses and residents. And as always, I appreciate the opportunity to speak, and I will follow up with you. Likewise, I think you have my email. I'd love to hear from anyone at the county in planning before they start to tear the school down next week. Thank you again for the opportunity to speak.

Thank you, Mr. Poole. Next, I see Mr. Cook. Mr. Cook's hand is raised. I'll unmute you, you'll have three minutes. Please remember to introduce yourself.

Thank you, Andrew, and I'm back. So here is your July. A volunteer little ditty for you here. Notice recent picnic for county employees and the wonderful work they do. Maybe someday we'll have a picnic for our marvelous volunteering crews. Here are some of your volunteers that make our ABCs function well. It's time for us to acknowledge them. A tailgate or weekend picnic would be swell. Just like Stafford Hamlet's meet and greet, conversations in relaxed, no agenda setting would be well received and appreciated by county leaders and volunteers we are vetting. No agendas, PowerPoints or Zooming, just like the good old days when people actually met in place, urban and unincorporated stories to be told. Advisory boards and commission members that make our county a great place to live would be nice to show appreciation for the volunteering hours that they give. Time to share hobbies and our histories, how our lives really do intertwine. better understanding one another over burgers, hot dogs, and conversation as we dine. As long as a long list of county volunteer presented at the end, too many to acknowledge, three minute limit, Andrew, you'd have to extend. So we appreciate the work that all our county workers do, commissioners, staff, employees, and our wonderful volunteers too. A fun time for those that oversee county advisory boards and commissions, a different way to improve our camaraderie to better our ABC's yearly missions. maybe a weekend celebration somewhere central in the county to bump elbows and put faces to our ABC's volunteering bounties. Now we'll stop and let you ponder. We've placed more in your busy troughs, CPOs and Hamlets ready to assist, picnic planning you can hand off. We look forward to our time to get to know each other better. Let's hope it is before we all start wearing our winter sweaters. One last shout out to our friends of the Hamlet of Beaver Creek, 20-year anniversary, climbing another wonderful peak. Once again, thank you for listening about county volunteers fulfilling our New Year's resolution, spreading monthly volunteering cheers. Of course, we'll try to be back next month, or maybe we'll just wait. To introduce our volunteers at our picnic would be great.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Cook. This is a final call. If you're attending this meeting virtually and have not yet had the opportunity to do so and wish to speak, to please raise your hand. Mr. Chair, I see no other members of the public, either physically or virtually present, wish to comment during general public communication today.

Thank you very much. I'll now recess as Board of County Commissioners, convene as Housing Authority Board, and turn to Gary. What do you have for us? Thank you, Chair.

This is the Housing Authority of Clackamas County Consent Agenda. Housing Commissioner Leenstra is not able to join you today, so it is just the five of you. Andrew, would you please read the Consent Agenda?

Housing Authority of Clackamas County consent agenda. Item A, approval of resolution to delegate leases and occupancy agreements signing authority to the executive director and authority staff. No fiscal impact, no county general funds are involved. Mr. Chair, that concludes the Housing Authority consent agenda.

All right, any colleague want to remove any item from the consent agenda? Seeing none, we may have a motion.

Chair, I move to approve the consent agenda as read.

second Commissioner West has moved to approve the housing authority consent agenda Commissioner Schrader a second of that any further discussion Seeing none clerk.

Will you please call the poll? Commissioner Savas. All right, Commissioner Helm. Hi Commissioner Schrader. Hi Commissioner West. All right, mr. Chair.

Hi motion passes 5-0. Mr. Chair. I Okay, I'll now adjourn as the Housing Authority Board and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Gary?

Thank you. Next is a public hearing, which is a second reading of Ordinance 08-2026, an ordinance amending Clackamas County Code Chapter 2.05, personnel policies and procedures for Clackamas County employees, and declaring an emergency. No fiscal impact, no county general funds are involved. Presenting is Assistant County Council Kresten Rice. Go ahead, please.

Good morning.

Good morning commissioners. As you know, this is part of an ongoing process initiated on May 6th, 2025 and approved by the board to update section 2.05 of the ordinance which is by far the longest part of the ordinance and by moving language from the ordinance into employment policy and practices, EPPs, And as you know, this is necessary because, well, laws change. And this makes for a more efficient and easier process in the future. The first hearing for the reading was held on July 9, 2026. And the second reading pertains to classification administration and compensation administration. Those sections of the ordinance have been moved to EPPs 70 and 71 respectively. Both EPPs have been approved by the administrator on March 10th of 2026.

Okay. Commissioner West, you had a comment?

Yeah, thank you. I'm supporting this, but my question is, is every time I see this, I think it's important to have a clear explanation. It says we're treating this as an emergency, declaring an emergency within this vote. Why, and what is the effect of declaring it as an emergency, and why do we need to do it on this ordinance specifically?

The emergency portion of this particular reading is only because the EPPs were already passed and approved in last year. And that's EPP 70 and 71. So currently the EPP and the ordinance both exist at the same time and creating kind of a conflict in the policy between classification and compensation.

If we don't declare it an emergency, what's the effect?

Well, then it just takes 90 days for it to, we just have to wait 90 days.

Okay. Thank you.

All right.

Any other questions?

Go ahead.

So next, I'll open the public hearing on this item. So clerk, would you please moderate that for us?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you're attending this meeting in person and wish to comment on this specific item only, this is your opportunity to please fill out a blue card and deposit it in the box. It can be found by the center doors. Seeing none, Mr. Chair, with your assent, I'll move to those attending virtually. If you're attending this meeting virtually and wish to comment on this specific item only, this is your opportunity to please raise your hand. I see no other members of the public, either physically or virtually present, to comment on this specific matter today, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Andrew. I'll now close the public hearing and check with my commissioners. Any other questions that might have arisen? Seeing none, is there a motion to read by title only? Chair, I move we read by title only.

Second.

All right, Commissioner Savas has moved to read by title only. Commissioner Helm has seconded that. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, you please call the poll.

Commissioner West. Aye. Commissioner Schroeder. Aye. Commissioner Helm. Aye. Commissioner Savas. Aye. Mr. Chair. Aye. Motion passes five to zero, Mr. Chair. Okay, clerk, will you help us out by reading the ordinance by title only? Yes, Mr. Chair. Ordinance 08-2026 is entitled, In Ordinance Amending Clackamas County Code Chapter 2.05, Personnel Policies and Procedures for Clackamas County Employees and Declaring an Emergency. That is the title of the ordinance, Mr. Chair. All right. A motion for final approval, please.

I move we approve Ordinance 08-2026. Second.

Commissioner Helm has moved to approve ordinance 08-2026. Commissioner Schrader has seconded that. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, you please call the poll.

Commissioner Savas? Aye. Commissioner West?

Aye.

Commissioner Schroeder? Aye. Commissioner Helm?

Aye.

Mr. Chair?

Aye. Motion passes 5-0, Mr. Chair. All right. Thank you. Gary, what's next? Very good. Thank you, Creston. Next is a board discussion item, Secure Rural Schools Payment Methodology Selection. We're actually going to do a short presentation for you, and then we do need your action today on this item. Presenting is going to be Dan Johnson in his role as interim finance director, this time, and Trent Wilson, government affairs manager from public and government affairs. So they'll give a quick update and then seek your input. Go ahead, please.

Thank you so much. Good morning, Chair Roberts and commissioners. We're going to talk to you about something that you don't do often, which is a decision, an election, regarding secure rural school funding. The last time we did this, I think, was back in 2022. And I don't really want to get into all the history. We can if you would like, but I don't want to get into all the history around the timber receipts and logging in Oregon and all the nuances associated with that. But essentially, the county has a point, a decision point, where we have to make one of two decisions. First decision presented for you today is whether or not, and both of them are good decisions. Both of them result in revenue to the county. I want to be clear about that. It's just different revenue to the county. The first election before you today is essentially a selection or an election that we choose to use the annual timber receipts as our methodology for collection, or do we wish to use the secure rural schools payment formula as our method for selection? I just want to stop there for one second. Going back a little bit into the history, historically, when we've made these selections, we have had the option between the timber receipts of the logging activity that occurs on different types of forest lands, and we've had to look at this, and we had the option to look at the secure rural schools funding that was associated or estimated to be provided to the county. Historically, they have been relatively similar. One may be a little bit more than the other. Generally, secure real schools was a little bit more. And that money was guaranteed. If reauthorized by Congress, those dollars are guaranteed. If it's not, and just on that point, if it's not reauthorized by Congress, then we revert back to the receipts. We get the receipts no matter what. This particular year, there have been some changes. Commissioner West was involved in this discussion. I'm assuming he's going to speak to his actions as a part of that dialogue and changes to law that have increased our distribution on certain types of forest lands. So we get a higher percentage of those receipts. It went from 50 to 75%. And so the material before you today has estimated figures of revenue that will come to the county. And right now, the methodology, roughly speaking, for secure rural schools, which is guaranteed money in the hand, is approximately $1.4 million, okay? The estimate on the logging and the receipts collection, if we were to choose to use the receipts methodology, is approximately 2.8 million based off past logging practices and assuming this increase in the distribution from 50 to 75%. That is the first selection that we need you to make. Should you elect to select the secure rural schools methodology over the timber receipts methodology, the next selection we would have to make is essentially around titles or certain percentages of distribution for those funds. And I don't want to get into the discussion around titles, but in short, the guidance the board previously has provided to us is to place percentages in those certain titles or distributions that provide the most amount of direct funding to the county. That was the guidance that was given us in 2022, which was to select secure real schools and to make sure those percentages provide as much direct funding to the county. That money is restricted in what it is used for, but maximize the amount of money that comes back directly to us versus money that may go back to the federal government that we may have to compete through through a grant program. I know that's a lot, and I apologize for that. Hopefully, I had a chance to look at the materials. Hopefully, some of you who were here for the discussion previously kind of recall some of that discussion. So I don't, again, the first question is around which methodology we're looking to use, the receipts or the secure real schools. And I think I'm going to stop right there. And Trent and I are here to answer any questions you may have.

Go ahead. Commissioner.

I don't have questions, but I can opine. Thank you, Chair Roberts. So a lot of work went in. When I got back from DC after that very robust lobbying effort that we made across the Western states, One of the things that we were advocating for and got was the increased percentage from 50% to 75% was a major ask. So the ONC group out of Oregon's western counties, Clackamas County, a lot of work went in with the administration and with congressional delegation to get that increase for increased revenue. So that's what we're seeing here. I know this is an estimate. I guess I will form a question. I know the answer to this, but I'll form the question is, has our timber receipts and over the last three years and SRS been relatively close? They've been close to being the same, correct? It's been relatively close. So it's unlikely if we selected timber receipts, it would become much less than what we've been familiar with.

Recently, I would say, yes, that's the case. Historically, no. That's why secure real schools came in. But recently, yes, I think the numbers have been relatively close. And it's just been the guarantee of the funding versus the estimates on the receipts they received. Am I correct that it could be more than 2.8%?

Yes, you are. It is an estimate. Okay. So wouldn't it be shocking with the increased new amount and the timber production that it could be more than 2.8? Yes. Okay. So I think our floor is pretty safe from what we've expected. And here's the other, speaking with the other western states at NACO, and a lot of this came up while at NACO, the western interstate region and the western counties of Oregon were dealing with these natural resource issues. Gary, thank you for your responsiveness to my questions as they were coming up, is not all states have our timber wealth or have our timber natural resources, even within the 16 western counties of Oregon. We have the sixth most, and it's quite a bit of acreage. Klamath County, for example, has very little, even though they're a western county. they have to rely on, they don't have the option to pick really ONC over SRS because they need the guarantee and the larger amount that SRS would bring them. When it's my understanding that if we have the ability also to take a reasonable risk and to allot for the timber receipts and not SRS, it increases the pie to other counties that are in different financial realities than Clackamas County. So if the western counties with larger ONC are more relying on their ONC timberlands, it provides additional vital revenue to counties that don't have ONC lands that do rely on SRS. It increases their percentage in that capacity. So I think it's good for the state if we take the timber receipts. I think the floor is pretty safe for us historically because there is some fluctuation. And I think the ceiling is really high on the revenue we can get directly into our general fund. we're talking about if if it's about a million and a half more 1.4 million more per year for the next three years that's four and a half million dollars we didn't project directly into our general fund potentially or more that could be a way to maybe look at this too I I think this is really good news. I'm excited that this is an option for us to have to be able to make. I'm going to support the timber receipts today as our option. That will be where my vote goes. I'm trying to think of anything else I want to, any context or anything I want to bring. We have to make the decision today because we have to make a decision. So that goes to AOC, then AOC goes to DAS and tells them what has enough time to kind of process everything. So we don't have the ability to punt on this. We have to choose today which avenue we're going to take. I might explain that correctly. That's correct. There was some confusion about that at NACO, but we worked through it. Thank you. Some of the other rural counties were like, oh, my God, Clackamas County, when are you going to make your decision? So there's a timeline that we're stuck to that's not movable. I don't know. I'll leave it at that. If maybe I can help answer any other questions as they come up, I'd be more than happy to help. But Trent and Dan have been phenomenal on this issue. We've done a lot of work on it, and we've come a long way in good policy movements. So thank you to both of you, and specifically, Trent, to you. I mean, great, great work on this. And thanks for your support in helping me learn this and dive right into it and get some good outcomes. So thank you.

Before we move on, I had a question about other counties in Oregon. Where are they leaning, or AOC, and kind of what you have seen from NACO? I mean, between those two choices.

I had most of the conversation with Klamath County. Commissioner DeRute, this is his wheelhouse. He's incredibly knowledgeable. He's also the, I think he's vice, he's president. He's incoming president for Western State Regents for the Western States. He has been a huge help, not just to myself, but I think all the Western counties on these policy issues and been really working hard back in D.C., He agrees that it would be smart for us to take our ONC allocation because we have the benefit of that because we have so many ONC lands. And there is a benefit to his county who has to rely on those SRS dollars. They have to rely on that federal subsidy because they don't have as many ONC lands. They just don't have the option that we do, but it increases counties like his, their pie a little bit more for those rural counties. And so I don't know if Douglas or Curry County but I suspect they will be taking their timber receipts and some of the ONC land western counties that have more of it like us will be considering those timber receipts instead of I mean, I can't remember the last time you really it's been a long time since we didn't take SRS So this is all this is new

Thank you, Commissioner. Yes, if you look at the last page of your packet, there's a formula that the Association of ONC Counties put together with the estimates, and ONC did the work of highlighting where the projected higher amounts were per county. So that's what those highlights represent there. This is a complicated document, so I would just draw your attention to the highlighted sides to show that's where they're recommending those folks would go, but I don't know what they've chosen.

I mean, Jackson's allotment is so much more than their SRS payments. And these are counties that have really struggled with solvency. You look at, yeah, Columbia will get significantly more than they had been, because they don't have very many, but it's a lot more for them. So I think it's gonna be a mixed bag with the more counties that can rely on O and C lands to provide these Fundings the better it is for the whole And a lot of work with this administration. Here's the other thing with SRS It was not it was really hard to get it past this last time and it was not for sure that it would get done legislatively Senator Ron Wyden was a major piece of that working with is it Campo out of Idaho and Is that his name, Campo? Senator out of Idaho? Crapo. Crapo, sorry. Senator Crapo out of Idaho worked really hand in hand with Ron Wyden. They didn't know it would get done. They don't know how he got it done. But the amount continues to be less and less. The current leadership in the House of Representatives is not a fan of this type of welfare to the western states. It's well known that Speaker Johnson is a little begrudgingly, you know, allowing this to move forward, at least on the House side. So politically, there is no guarantees that SRS will be, you know, really viable moving forward. So there's a lot of political uncertainty, but for some reason, and somehow it keeps getting over the finish line, but is by far not guaranteed that SRS will be an option in future legislative sessions.

Thank you. Maybe just a way to simplify that is that both of our congressional senators are doing excellent work on both of these columns. Senator Wyden has been a champion of SRS since the year 2000 and so has been helping to reauthorize this for a long time. And Senator Merkley was the champion to change that formula percentage earlier this year. And so really a big thanks to our congressional delegation for their help in making either of these a real option for us. Fantastic.

Commissioner Allen.

Okay, so... Little confusion. Is this a county-by-county decision? Or is our decision, right, so it is county-by-county. Is it then a yearly decision? No.

Three years.

Three years. So you said 2022. That's why we're coming back now. And why would we pick a smaller number instead of a bigger number?

One is only guaranteed. SRS is fully guaranteed as long as it gets authorized by Congress.

But it has to be authorized yearly.

But it has to, no, that's still every three years.

SRS is three, and I know Senator Wyden is trying to get this permanent. He's working very, very hard, and so is Mark Lee, on making this SRS permanent. But the fact that it barely just passed tells me that that might be up for grabs. So I don't disagree with you, but I'm also thinking about the state in general, which is why I ask if it's county by county, they have to decide. So I... I don't know, it's kind of like gambling in a way, and I'm not a gambler, so.

And I guess to speak pointedly to the reauthorization, Again, if it does not get reauthorized, we automatically go into the receipts methodology. Okay.

Okay. So there's no loss there. So we're fine to go with the ONC receipts and then default to if that. Yeah. Okay. Okay. That makes sense. All right. Thank you.

Commissioner Salvas. Yeah, I'm going back several years when I first got on as a county commissioner and sat in some of those meetings, forestry-related issues, whether it's state lands or federal lands, ONC lands, different rules or organizations. My question is this. is the amounts the distribution showed on the screen here based on a the pool of harvest around the state or is dependent on a particular harvest in Clackamas County?

So The ONC lands are really cool because you're working as a group. So whether the harvest happens in Jackson County, Josephine County, if I did the right counties there, Douglas County, Lane County, as a group, that money is pulled out to the group. So it's like a co-op almost. It's not whether harvest happens in Clackamas County, we get those Clackamas dollars. That's not how the ONC formula works. So there's a full bucket of money. And what you see here on this page, you can see at the top is the 2026 estimated timber value. That $60 million was about roughly what the BLM pulled in in 2025. So it's based on their last year harvest. And there's some expectation that it could do better or it could do worse. It is a commodity. It is a stock market type of situation. So I just want to be very clear about that. So they took last year's number to kind of give you a conservative estimate. They are expecting more harvest in the next couple years, but they focused on last year's harvest to give you that baseline So with 75% you see that they took that 45 million dollars Guess there and said that from that this is what everyone would receive from a timber harvest That's how this number came to fruition as an estimate Is that helpful?

Yeah, that gives me more comfort knowing, because I think it's the state lands that, you know, it really depends on what's cut in your county. ONC, thanks for that clarification, is not. So I have more confidence taking the option of the ONC.

I' m going to go to the next question. I' m going to go to the next question. there is a push right now to increase bore feet from where it has through Better Forest Management, more board feet. And the lands can absolutely handle more board foot. And there seems to be some bipartisan support and we need additional board feet. Am I, is that correct? Which is a change now.

A presidential executive order for the Bureau of Land Management to do more.

And when we met with the Bureau of Land Management, we met with the undersecretary, they're fast tracking, hopefully the increase. And the only place where they can actually do this, increase board feet, in the nation that still has the infrastructure to do that is in Oregon. It doesn't exist in the western states. Their mills and their infrastructure to actually produce has been decimated for a number of reasons. But in Oregon, even though we're still seeing some difficulties with our infrastructure, we can still produce the board feed that they want to produce through the executive order. We still have that capacity. We're the only place in the country.

All right. So the first decision we have to make is a motion on the payment methodology. If there's no other questions, go ahead, Commissioner Salvas.

Well, Chair, I do recall and staff did clarify at least one point that I was asking, so I appreciate that. I know things like this are complicated, not unlike transportation or land use or MPAC or JPAC or NCPRD. I mean, all these different things. So I am, you know, I think rightfully we appointed Commissioner West to be the lead on this and I think he's informing us. He's working with people I know other County Commissioners I know that I have confidence and trust in so on behalf of you our representative and this is your recommendation I'm gonna I'm gonna go with you my friend. Thank you It's more money to the county if everything comes through and potentially even more than what's listed here So I I understand we don't there's no guarantees. I understand that But I appreciate your work on this

Thank you. Do you want to make a motion?

Yeah, go ahead.

Chair, I move that we direct staff to elect payments based on timber receipts.

Second. All right. Commissioner West has made a motion to direct staff to elect payment based on timber receipts. It's been seconded by Commissioner Salvas. Any further questions or comments? Hearing none, clerk, will you please call the poll?

Commissioner Helm.

Aye. Aye.

Commissioner Schroeder.

Aye.

Commissioner Savas. Aye. Commissioner West. Aye. Mr. Chair. Aye. Motion passes 5-0, Mr. Chair. All right.

So my question to you, Gary, then, do we need to move forward with this next? You're done because only if you chose option two would you have the follow-up motion, which is not necessary any longer. So you are finished. All right. And then Dan and Trent, please let AOC, Association of Oregon Counties, know today. Yes, sir. And we'll get it in the pipeline.

Okay.

Thank you very much. Thank you. All right, Gary, what do you have next? Thank you. Next is the consent agenda for the Board of County Commissioners. Andrew, would you please read the consent agenda?

Board of County Commissioners Consent Agenda. Item A, elected officials. One, approval of previous business meeting minutes for the Board of County Commissioners. Two, approval of an intergovernmental agreement with Clackamas County Fairgrounds and Events Centre for law enforcement services during the county fair. Agreement value is $26,082 for five days. Funding is through reimbursement from the Fairgrounds and Events Centre. B, tourism, one. Approval of an amendment to a contract with Travel Oregon for regional cooperative tourism plan implementation funds. Amendment value is $500,000 for one year. Total contract value is $1 million for two years. Funding is through Travel Oregon. No county general funds are involved. C, facilities management, one. Approval of a contract with K&L Industries for parking lot repaving. Contract value is $746,262 for five months. Funding is through budgeted county general funds. D, public and government affairs. One, approval of a contract with Northwest Public Affairs for state legislature and agency lobbying services. Agreement value is $169,000 for two years. Funding is through department franchise fee revenue and allocated cost, which does include a small portion of budgeted county general funds. E, technology services. One, approval of an amendment to a contract with Mythix for PeopleSoft security enhancements. Amendment value is $60,000 for two years. Total contract value is $210,000 for two years. Funding is through budgeted departmental cost allocations, which does include a small portion of budgeted county general funds. F, disaster management, one. Approval of a grant application to the United States Department of Homeland Security for emergency response equipment and personnel training. Grant value is approximately $2,020,000 for two years. Funding is the United States Department of Homeland Security. No county general funds are involved. G, transportation development, one. Approval of board order and quitclaim deed for David J. Topper to repurchase a tax-foreclosed parcel located at 33615 Southeast Blackberry Lane, Sandy. Sale price is $26,617.90. Funding is to the purchaser. No county general funds are involved. Two, approval of a grant contract extension with the United States Department of Transportation for a revised Transportation Safety Action Plan. Extension has no fiscal impact. Total agreement value is $413,905 for three years. Funding is the United States Department of Transportation. No county general funds are involved. 3. Approval of financial assistance from Metro for waste reduction and recycle at work program plan implementation funds. Assistance value is $508,656 for one year. Funding is through Metro. No county general funds are involved. H. Health, Housing, and Human Services. 1. Approval of an intergovernmental agreement with Multnomah Education Service for Medicaid administrative claiming technical support and billing services. Agreement value is $78,919.50 for one year. Funding is the Oregon Health Authority. No county general funds are involved. Two, approval of revenue intergovernmental agreement with the Oregon Health Authority for Medicaid administrative claiming reimbursement. Contract value is $3 million for five years. Funding is the Oregon Health Authority. No county general funds are involved. Three, approval of subrecipient grant agreement with the Fourth Dimension Recovery for expansion of substance use disorder street level outreach. Agreement value is $102,360 for one year. Funding is through opioid settlement funds. No county general funds are involved. Four, approval of an amendment to a subrecipient grant agreement with Fora Health for recovery campus design, development, and construction services. Amendment adds the construction phase of the project. Amendment value is $23,290,003 for two years. Total agreement value is $26,098,512 for three years. Funding through Trillium Community Health Plan, Opioid Settlement, Supportive Housing Services measure funds, and Oregon Health Authority grant funds. No kind of general funds are involved. Approval lease agreement for health for the lease of property for the construction operation of the recovery campus Agreement value is $20 for 20 years funding is through for health. No kind of general funds are involved Mr.

Chair that concludes the Board of Commissioners consent agenda Thank You Andrew Does anyone wish to remove any item? See none may have a motion

Chair, I move that we approve the consent agenda as read. Second. And there's so many awesome recovery campus things in this consent agenda. I see you, Cindy, and team in the back.

There they are. Second.

All right. Commissioner West has moved to approve the consent agenda Commissioner Schrader a second any further discussion Yeah, I've never seen a Cindy so excited over a consent agenda.

Yes All right clerk you please call the poll Commissioner Savas Aye. Commissioner Helm.

Aye.

Commissioner Schroeder.

Aye.

Commissioner West. Aye. Mr. Chair. Aye. Motion passes 5-0.

Mr. Chair. All right. Thank you, Andrew. I will now recess the Board of County Commissioners, Conveners, and North Galaxians Parks and Rec District Board of Directors.

Gary. Thank you. You're now meeting as the North Clackamas Parks and Recreation District Board of Directors. This is a board discussion item, a draft letter to the city of Milwaukee. Board, when you met in executive session on July 14th, 2026, you directed staff to draft a letter for your consideration to the mayor and city councilors of Milwaukee to clarify some misstatements you felt that was made at their last city council meeting in Milwaukee. July so during your short recess staff has drafted a proposed letter for your consideration is before you today We are seeking your input if you have any edits or if you are prepared to approve the letter to be sent Kia Sally the district director is here. I am here Billy is here. We all helped draft this letter So we're happy to answer any questions you may have but ultimately seeking your approval of this letter to send to the city of Milwaukee I Thank you. All right.

Commissioner Savas, go ahead.

Yeah, thank you. I appreciate staff's work on identifying all these things. I think everything there is relatively accurate. With one, I just read it again this morning, I realized there's just one error. And I had already talked to Gary many weeks ago about this when it came up, but the board said September, not September 1. So I just ask that we change that verbiage to say the board requested input by September, not September 1. So it strikes September 1.

So just get rid of the 1 and put September 2026?

Strike the 1, right, and leave it September 2026. Okay. Okay.

That is accurate. Your motion did not say when. I will own this. I'm the one who said, oh, by September 1st. But you did not make that clear in your motion. I apologize. You said September.

Did you say there was another one, Commissioner Savas, that you thought?

That was the only other.

That's it.

Commissioner Helm.

No, I just wanted to comment. This is a really good letter. I appreciate that we are responding to a lot of misinformation out there and it's disappointing and disturbing that we're having to do this letter. to correct the record. There's a lot of corrections in here. And so I just encourage everyone, and I don't know that, will we be posting this anywhere for people to see, or I doubt the city of Milwaukee will, but I'm hoping they would.

After you approve it, we'll post it online.

Okay, so I just, it gives a lot of great information that helps for clarification, I think, for people. So it's a great letter and I appreciate staff doing this.

Council did you have a comments?

I think there's one additional edit to be made that key is pointed out under item for The third line down should read and the district will amend the 2025 system plan instead of 2026 Yeah, so thanks to Kia for that Thank you

But, Chair, I move we approve the letter as amended.

Second. Director Savas has moved to approve the letter. Director West has seconded that. Any further discussion?

Yeah, Chair, just some commentary. I just want to build on Commissioner Helms' comments. I have been somewhat inundated by members of the community about statements that were made both within the City Council meetings in Milwaukee and our September 24 meeting, the July 8th meeting, and a number of things that are circulating. Unfortunately, as with when information is circulated, sometimes it kind of changes, takes a life of its own. So last night I was in a community meeting where it was presented that these IGAs were final and we were simply asking the DAC to approve these final IGAs, which is not true. And I think that that, I looked in the I looked in the July 8th meeting, and no one in the meeting said these IGAs are final, whether it was myself or Director Selle or Legal Counsel Munns. No one said that, so I don't know where that came from. I suspect that perhaps maybe it came from conversations from Milwaukee that they felt it was final or that was their final. I don't know. I don't know. I'm just speculating. But there's a lot of misinformation. I think that's the... Pointed this letter as a clarify that I I think are the citizens and within the district deserved no less than this Thank you

Yeah, thank you, Chair. It was news to us that it was final. Maybe Milwaukee thought it was final, but we thought we were still in negotiations, which doesn't shock me because when you're in negotiations dealing with contracts and properties, professionally, those things are always done in private. That's the professional standard. It's not some novel idea that we were advised by council, but it's obvious that that's how that should be done. The city of Milwaukee though has decided to operate one way behind closed doors and propagandize and not be truthful and do the spin machine in the public. And we've been resistant of doing that because we want to operate professionally within a negotiation practices that are standard and best practice. We haven't had that same respect from the city of Milwaukee. I was shocked to find out that at the last DEAC meeting that all of a sudden when we wanted to make sure that there was some judicious kind of time to really ponder and consider the IGAs and be advised by a board and give them enough time to do that work in a way that was responsible to give us the advice that we were seeking as the elected body. Right out the gate, they were making a decision on whether or not those IGAs should be approved, so that seemed to be pre-orchestrated and once again politicized and probably pushed by certain powers or motives out of the city of Milwaukee, but that was not the will of this board to make a decision on that IGA in meeting one. So that is not what we asked that advisory board to do. We asked them to take their time. We asked them to learn. We asked them to consider and to be judicious. We asked them to really roll up their sleeves and do that work. You can't do that in meeting one. I would be shocked if they could accomplish that at that kind of light speed, but that was not the direction of this board. It seems to be more propagandizing and pulling levers publicly. And it's unfortunate that we have to write such a letter with so many corrections in it to put on the public record because we no longer have a partner who wants to work with us the way that they should in negotiations. And so this is us correcting the record and being honest and truthful so the public can have the full picture. I would encourage this board that advises us to do the work and to not make a decision until September. I would not accept their decision if they thought they could make it that quickly. I would not take it seriously. I want them to do the work, and we've given you time to do that. Please advise this elected body in your role, but you're going to need time to do that. It reminds me of a kid that's like, I finished the test or got the homework done in five minutes, and the teacher looks at them and is like, no, you didn't. And so I am looking at it through that lens. I support this letter, but I am just tired of just the foolishness and the kabuki theater coming out of Milwaukee. I'm tired of it. We all want to get to the same place and do good work. um just stop it it's not going to move the board the way you want it to we want to get to good policy we know it's been a long road but at the end of the day our responsibility to the district is to put it on sure footing to do the right thing and to get it done um in a collaborative way we need you to be more collaborative and that's how we get this done ultimately And so I'll be supporting this letter, but it has been unfortunate watching things unfold they have since the last district meeting. Thank you.

Yeah, thank you, Chair. I'd be remiss if I didn't take this opportunity to clarify something. And this is something that I think we all, not all, but Gary and I and staff have looked back and looked at the conversation that took place on June 24th. And I just want to make you, my colleagues aware of this as well. I think there was some confusion as to... whether or not we were asking them to review the IGAs or we're asking them to review all the material, including the options and everything that we were considering at a high level, right? And I think that we were not... I'll take some responsibility for that. You know, we're not crystal clear, but I think Gary's comments during that meeting were we don't expect the DAC members to review the IGAs because that is something that is... It's never worked in my 20-some-odd years of public service. It's too complex. It was more about the principles or strategies or options and all those things and all moving pieces. And they could advise us on, hey, we like this or we don't like that. It's not that they even necessarily need to vote, right? So it's really to advise us on what they like or don't like in the context of that entire packet that was on June 24th. So Gary, is that about right? Yes, it is. Thank you. Great. I just want to just take this opportunity to clarify that for everyone. So if anyone watches this, they'll know that it's not the IGAs. They were tasked with tackling only. Thank you.

All right. Any other comments? Is there a motion? It's made. Oh.

Yep.

So I guess we're at... That's right. We already did that. So it's called for a poll.

Yes, Mr. Chair. Director Schroeder.

Aye.

Director Helm.

Aye.

Director Savas. Aye. Director West. Aye. Mr. Chair. Aye. Motion passes 5-0, Mr. Chair.

Commissioners, do you want all five of you to sign the letter or just the chair on behalf of the board?

I'll fight. I can put my signature on it. We're all here. All five? Yeah. Okay. Okay.

All right, I'll now adjourn as the North Clackamas Parks Board of Directors convene as the Development Agency Board. Gary.

Thank you. You're now meeting as the Development Agency Board of Directors for Clackamas County. This is the consent agenda. Andrew, would you please read the consent agenda?

Development Agency Consent Agenda. Item A, approval of a disposition agreement with 9816 Fuller for sale of agency property located at 8505 Southeast Audie Road, Happy Valley. Sale price is $230,000. Funding is through the purchaser. No county general funds are involved. Mr. Chair, that concludes the development agency consent agenda.

All right. Is there a desire to remove anything from the consent agenda? Seeing none, may I have a motion?

I move we approve the Development Agency Consent Agenda.

Second.

Director Helm has moved to approve the Development Consent Agenda. Director Schroeder has seconded that. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, will you please call the poll?

Director West?

Aye.

Director Schroeder?

Aye.

Director Helm?

Aye.

Director Savas? Aye. Mr. Chair? Aye. Motion passes 5-0, Mr. Chair.

I'll now adjourn as a Development Agency Board and convene as the Water Environment Services Board of Directors. Gary?

Thank you. You're now meeting as the Water Environment Services Board of Directors. This is the Water Environment Services Consent Agenda. Andrew, would you please read the Consent Agenda?

Water Environment Services Board of Directors Consent Agenda. Item A, approval of an intergovernmental agreement with Clackamas River Water Providers for Clackamas River Watershed Spill Prevention Studies and Public Outreach. Agreement value is $74,000 for five years. Funding is through Water Environment Services Surface Water Operating Funds. No county general funds are involved. B. Approval of resolution of necessity and purpose authorizing the acquisition of easements by good faith negotiations or, if necessary, condemnation for the Rock Creek Interceptor Extension. Funding is through Water Environment Services Sanitary Sewer Construction Fund. No county general funds are involved. Mr. Chair, that concludes the Water Environment Services Consent Agenda. Thank you.

Does any director wish to remove item from the consent agenda? Seeing none, may I have a motion?

I move we read the water environment or approve the water environment services consent agenda as read.

Second.

Director Schroeder has moved to approve the consent agenda. Director Helm has seconded that. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, will you please call the poll? Director Savas?

Aye. Director West?

Aye.

Director Helm?

Aye.

Director Savas, I'm sorry, excuse me, Director Schrader?

Aye.

Mr. Chair? Aye. Motion passes 5-0, Mr. Chair.

Andrew, I want to point out that's the first mistake you've made in six months.

I know, right? Fail. Whoa, whoa, whoa. I don't get two votes?

I was like, wow. He was testing you, and you passed the test. That was a good one.

I don't mind, Andrew. I know.

I was like, that guy is flawless. Oh, my gosh. I will now adjourn as the Water Environment Services Board of Directors and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners.

Thank you. Next is county administrator update. That is me. I like to recognize our county employees during my time today. I want to recognize our technology services team, in particular, Kevin Golusha, who is a security architect on the technology services team. He recently received a national award on behalf of Clackamas County. The award is the Community Impact Award from the Multistate Information Sharing and Analysis Center. This center provides cyber threat prevention, protection, response, and recovery support for state, local, tribal, and territorial governments across the United States. Kevin was recognized for playing a pivotal role in reviewing cybersecurity grants for state and local agencies, along with sharing actionable cyber threat intelligence and system vulnerability data that helped stop active threats across the U.S. His work fostered strong partnerships throughout Oregon public sector agencies. Kevin was acknowledged during the awards ceremony. Kevin has done an excellent job making Clackamas County, Oregon known as the agency that offers a helping hand to public sector agencies across the U.S. Congratulations, Kevin, and our entire team in technology services. That is keeping us all safe from the ever-present threat of cyber attacks and cybersecurity. Thank you, Kevin and team. Finally, some announcements. As you know, there is no business meeting next Thursday, July 30th, due to lack of quorum, due to your travel schedules. The next board business meeting is Thursday, August 6th. That is my update today. Thank you. Back to you, Chair.

All right. As we shift to Commissioner of Communication, before I turn it over to Commissioner Schrader, I just wanted to kind of announce, I know my colleagues all know that Sheriff Brandenburg announced her retirement yesterday and start off just thanking her for her 35 years of service. It was some short notice and that is one of the reasons why we took some of the things off the agenda to have some more research done and kind of pause for all of us. I really want to highly emphasize that this board entirely supports the Clackamas County Sheriff's Office and that We'll continue to do that. I know as we kind of move forward, we have some tough decisions to make as far as the public safety levy. And I know that this can cause a lot of angst to the employees. And I guess my message to them is to reassure them that we're committed to finding this funding one way or another, that every job at the sheriff's office is critically important. I want you to know that we are here and we're going to work diligently to make sure that we do everything possible to make sure we retain every single job at that sheriff's office. So I know there's some angst. We're going to get through this. I think, you know, challenges come upon us and this is really a time I believe where we really just need to come together and and work hard and We'll do that and and we'll be successful so with that I know this it just presents a lot of challenges and angst and I just want to reassure everybody that we're incredibly committed and to do what it takes to make sure we retain every single job there so With that, I'm going to turn it over to my esteemed, I don't want to call you senior, because we're both seniors, right?

We're both seniors.

That's okay.

The vice will just own it. I know, I know.

Let's go get our discount. There you go. Okay. Martha.

Well, thanks for that, Chair. Yeah, we are seniors. And I like to think that because we're seniors that we've accumulated some wisdom through our lives. So to all the new young up-and-comers, come talk to us. We know a lot. And sometimes we can... help direct you in ways you might not expect. So in any case, I just got back from the National Association of Counties meeting, where I attended probably one of the best community economic and workforce development symposiums that we've had in a long time because what it really talked about was economic development as a community builder and a way to continue to have dialogue with each other and to start to trust each other again in civic places because that seems to be something that has been lacking lately. And as many of you know, I always have the... notion of not left, not right, but forward, because counties really, I think, are, particularly after the conversation we had about the civic infrastructure, we're that level of government where we're pragmatists, gotta make sure the roads are fixed, have to make sure that our social service delivery systems are sound and making sure that people get what they need and when they need it. We take care of everything from behavior health as well as public health. We're part of a community justice system, you know, working for public justice together with our DAs and the rest of our court system here. You name it, counties do it. And so that discussion, I thought, was probably one of the most remarkable ones. And I'm going to hold it dear for quite a long time because it was a good way to really understand take us into account for what we do and what we do well. And that we are, I always believe, the least partisan part of government here, because we've got to basically focus on the results. And to that end, I want to let you know that, as usual, I have accumulated a lot of literature from the policy tables that are there. And I bring them back with me every year. So you will see a pile of them. in probably the break room. And so please take them, take a look at them. It's an overview of what the 2026 federal policies are going to be for the National Association of Counties, which includes every part of this nation, the Northwest, the West, the Midwest, the East Coast, all of our regions coming together for the good of the people as the oldest form of government in the United States. So that's all I have today. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Salas.

Yeah, first of all, I appreciate, Chair, you bringing up the sudden retirement of Sheriff Brandenburg. As you know, I've been speaking, and I think we are in agreement, it sounds like, that it's imperative we get the levy passed. And I do recognize and I agree that I think the uncertainty that it places upon the employees within the Sheriff's Department, the longer that uncertainty goes, the potential for more employees to maybe look somewhere else. I wouldn't want to lose our investments or those people that have been dedicated to serving this county on behalf of our, again, on behalf of the county. So with that said, I know we'll be discussing this Tuesday. And, you know, the question of going in November or going in in April or May, that is. I think the longer it is, it extends that uncertainty. And that's what I'm struggling with. That said, in looking at last May's election, I think the lack of presence of people pitching the or folks pitching the levy and so forth, I think maybe contributed to, you know, maybe the failure. I think normally, and Chair Roberts, as a sheriff, you were present often as a sheriff, especially on levy time. You're there. You were there. You're in uniform. That commands a certain amount of respect and understanding. I think that people in Clackamas County really value public safety. And I think presence like that is important. And I always try to figure out, while it might be disappointing sometimes when someone announces their retirement, There's always look at the upside and the unique opportunities that provides. So hypothetically, if there were three candidates running for sheriff or four, whatever the number is, two, one, I don't know what it's going to be. But let's just say three for sake of argument. The unique opportunity for the November election is you had three potentially candidates running for sheriff at the forums. In the public ever present, you know That would help pitch that normally it's one sheriff plus five commissioners in this case. It'd be maybe one interim sheriff or three Or more people candidates so you have more people speaking you have more faces bringing that I just think that the November putting on the ballot in November is is a unique opportunity that, come in May, we won't have that. And I think that it would be extremely advantageous, again, to take advantage, to move forward with this and help promote that. And for all the issues that are out there on behalf of the levy, I'm sure that any candidate running would support the levy, I would assume. But I would say that it's really a call to action. I think we ought to move forward very quickly. Now, that means forming an ad hoc group of folks to help adjust the language and go through the numbers. But I would advocate on Tuesday, I'm just not saying today, but I just say on Tuesday, we really consider fast-tracking the work it takes to get this on the ballot in November.

Thank you.

And with Chair, I think that's so important. I'm just going to leave it there and yield back.

Go ahead, Commissioner.

Thank you. There's a lot to consider. You just threw a lot on the table. Look at you, just dropping the mic right there. Big decision on Commissioner comments. We'll have to talk. I don't know. Gosh, it feels a little bit like a bomb went off. Thank you, Sheriff Brandenburg, for your three-plus decades of service to Clackamas County. Thank you very much. Thank you for your public service, Sheriff. It's not an easy job. You're greatly appreciated, and thank you for that work. Now we have to govern through it, unexpected, but here we go, and it's happening quick. I mean, we have a lot coming at us, and I'm sure that counsel and Gary and your team will advise us about options. We don't totally know what those are. This is a little unprecedented, but this board is really competent and really strong and smart and hardworking, so I'm sure we'll get there. I am appreciative of Chair Roberts and his years of experience, and he actually got a levy passed. and got it done and was there in uniform and strong and present and did that work. So if we don't have a sheriff during this, we might rely heavily on you, sir, to help us bring that same presence.

You're like, thanks.

You're like, hush. But, you know, we were, I think we're all trying to run the same direction here and we are committed to making sure that that department is stable, secure, moving forward and, We have your backs. We got you. We're not going to let things fall apart. We're going to work with the leadership at the sheriff's office that is currently there. I see two of them in the back of the room. We got you guys. We got your backs. We're on your team. We're committed to that. Pass that along to the rank and file below you. We got you. So with that said, NACO was a lot of fun. I was there with Martha to make a strong pivot. It's been a good chunk of the conference. Stuff that stood out to me was, of course, working with Health and Human Services and the opioid symposiums that they did. Did a lot of work with opioid dollars. Clackamas County, we've been set to receive just over $24 million of those national opioid settlement dollars. We get those dollars nationally. Counties and local governments and states get that. There's different allotments. I won't get into it. But over the next 17 to 18 years, NACO has framework to help guide counties. They started in the morning with here's the basics. If you've never heard of opioid settlement dollars to later on working towards more advanced policy conversations later into the day. I was there with AOC President Scar and NACO staff as we were looking at that. What I pulled out of that is I'm so proud of Clackamas County and how we're ahead of the curve and very cutting edge in how we manage those specific dollars. A few things that we use is that we help jail-based abatement through medication-assisted treatment. And we have specialized outpatient services. We have youth prevention. We have assets and resources going to rural communities through our opioid dollars. It is gonna help fund the recovery campus in the first two phases. We got creative with those dollars. And so we've done a lot of really good work. We're doing 40 recovery. We just approved today through this very, pay attention to the consent agenda. They're not always boring. Today's was pretty robust and pretty remarkable with the things the county was doing through just the consent agenda. And 4D Recovery today is a phenomenal organization working with youth that we all support and have become close with as a county. They benefit from these opioid dollars. One thing that they commonly talk about is how we came about this through the overprescription of opioids and oxycodone and things like that through the medical practices and what was commonplace in medicine. they do fail to take that next step about the impact through the fentanyl crisis, which is like, let's pour gasoline on it, right? And so not everywhere in the nation has the exact same issues that we have here on the West Coast, specifically in the Portland area. So it's a little bit unique for us in some of it. We've had to really kind of grow up fast and get really smart and savvy with the opioid policies. But a lot of conversation and work around that, trying to get best practices, trying to get some information from NACO, working with them. I'm not totally there, but on our SSP policy we're considering, we're on buffer zones and thoughts around that. So that was good, good work with natural resources, timber stuff, stuff we talked about today. And then congratulations to the new second VP. I did not vote for her nor would have, but she is the new second VP out of Arizona, Sarah Benatar, soon future president. And then a lot of good networking opportunities happened at NACO.

And they would like actually to send them a case study, since you mentioned it, about what we've done on our recovery campus. So that might be something that you and I and all of us talk about because they were so impressed with it that someone approached me and said, we hear what you've been doing. And I said, well, you've got to go to the right guy, which is you. But I'd like to pass that along and make sure that it becomes something that is replicated across the board. And we were asked to provide it.

It was super hot and sweaty.

Oh, yeah.

The food was good. A little bit of jazz. It was a good time. And thank you for the recommendations on restaurants and other things. So we had an opportunity to really connect with other colleagues from across the country and locally and with here in Oregon. So good work was done. And that is all I have this week.

Right. Thanks, Commissioner. Commissioner Howell.

Well, I'll echo a lot of my colleagues' statements about Sheriff Brandenburg's impending retirement, which as of Monday, this coming Monday, and thank her for her service as well. I'm one of these that looks at it as one door closes, another one opens. So I'm trying to see all the... The positives in this, and I have respect for her that the timing of this seems a little odd, but it does open the door for people to run at this next election. So anyway, it's been busy. You guys have been gone partying in New Orleans. No, I'm just kidding. I've attended more meetings in the last week than I think I have in the entire last year. So starting with last week, Commissioner Savas and I attended the joint fair board meeting out in Canby and took a tour of the new event center. which is well underway. It's 43,000 square feet with about 38,000 square feet of flex space. This can literally go from housing, sounds a little weird, you know, cattle or, you know, farm animals one day to a wedding venue the next day. That's how cool they have this set up with the strip drains and the way they can section it off and everything. It's going to be a beautiful building when it's done. They've thought of all the kind of the bells and whistles and stuff. So that was good. And then we attended their part of their meeting as well. Then I don't know, there's been JPEC meetings, C4 meetings, 82nd Avenue transit and policy and budget committee meetings last night was I think I set a record with the impact meeting the packet was 747 pages long so these are these are long intense meetings regarding our you know everything going on in the region right so and I will just highlight Again, those of you who are listening to go onto Metro's website, MPAC is the Metro Policy Advisory Committee, to go on their website and look up the future vision. This is the next vision for our region as a whole and that we all as local jurisdictions give our input on what we want that to look like as well. There's a lot of youth involvement in this. They're having a summit in October. at the convention center I believe. So they're just gathering a lot of information right now and everyone's voice is very important and I just want to say go online and give them your two cents worth. It's really worth it. Then Tuesday we attended, Commissioner Savas and I attended the Metro Council meeting at the Concord Community Center where they presented nearly $30 million in grant money to Clackamas County for parks. It was very celebratory, I will say. It was pretty exciting. But it was their regular meeting. So we sat through the regular meeting as well as the grant award portions of it. And they had a huge thing out in the hallway with all of the parks that they're going to be building. And it's pretty fascinating. That's also online. So I encourage people to go look at all the new fun parks that are coming. Thank you, Metro, for your generosity. The best part of the last week was spending my weekend with my kids, grandkids, and my sons-in-laws all together in one house for the weekend. And it was fun, but it was exhausting. So with all the grandparents there, we were able to pass the babies and we all took turns and It was very fun. It's the start of a yearly tradition over in Pacific City with Dory Days, which is where they celebrate the dory boats every year. And there was a very long parade, probably the longest parade ever, celebrating the birthday of the United States. And it was an amazing weekend. So a lot of cooking, a lot of cleaning, a lot of crying babies. But it was very fun. So anyway. Grandparenting is amazing.

I'll be I'll be seeing mine soon Yeah back to you chair Just a couple quick comments, I think that The heat and temperature lately has kind of been making me reflect back on 2020 so just still remind everybody we have right now 76 active fires in in the state of Oregon. The highest concentration, obviously, is in central northern part of the state. And as the lightning was coming out last night, I was thinking, oh, no. But I think this is just a really important time for all of us to be very vigilant. Cautious with any kind of outdoor activity that might be related to potential fires so and with that heat I know we were in the triple digits where it was extremely hot and Again, that's where I get concerned about seniors and others that don't have air conditioning and some of those things so I'd ask everybody to kind of take a look at their neighbors or those that are elderly and And just another comment, and I just have the utmost respect for individuals that have served in our military, and I think it's easy to not recognize those that really sacrificed their life for our country. And so right now we've had 17 soldiers die in the war in Iran recently. We also just had... Three more. I mean, Tyler James, or no, I'm sorry. It's, yeah, Tyler James Fennin and Private Isabel Gonzalez and Sergeant Angel Ramsud. So just a shout out to all those that currently serve, those that have served and those that made the sacrifice. So I don't want their names forgotten, so. With that being said, if nobody has anything else, on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners, thank you for joining us today, and we will be adjourned.