Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We are going to call the meeting over here. I am the vice chair. The chair is not here. My name is Pat Terry. Meet call to order. All right. Um this is the October 14th, 2025 meeting the Guspay planning commission. There's a couple of uh couple of public hearing a couple of items on the agenda today. If anybody wants to speak, make sure you fill out the speaker form and uh get that squared away. And if you do come to speak, we ask that you step up to the podium, keep it on topic, and keep it 3 minutes or less. I'm going to be monitoring that with a stopwatch. Not really, but if it gets long, it gets digress. Bang on that gavl there, which I've never got to do before. So, I'm really eager to do that. Okay. So, what do we do first? Roll call.

Commissioner Miller. Commissioner Stevens, Commissioner Agiri, Commissioner Berg here, Commissioner Davis here, Commissioner Marino here, and Vice Chair Terry

here. Okay, so four out of seven. I believe that's a quorum. There we go. So, first thing, public comment not related to the agenda items. anybody once, twice, thrice. Okay, so the first agenda item, make sure I get the right one first. 115. 114 probably comes before 115. Sorry, I'm the vice chair. I didn't prepare much for this, so bear with me. Okay, this is the call and procedure for the hearing. I now open a public hearing on land used application number 187-25-0000114 P is in papa L is in limo N is in November G is in golf proposal to approve and adopt by ordinance text amendments to the city of Kuspay comprehensive plan today is October 14th 2025 it's approximately I don't know 6:06 p.m. My name is Pat Terry. I'm the vice chairman of the planning commission. Um the planning commission will make a recommendation to the city council on this application based on the complete record including the testimony received at tonight's public hearing. These proceedings will be recorded. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with the Kuspay development code and state law. Specifically, city staff will first present the staff report and recommendation for public testimony. I will first ask to hear from people who would like to speak in favor of the proposal and then I want to hear from the opposition to the proposal. And again, make sure you stand there. Make sure you speak in the microphone. I often get in trouble for not doing that. Miss Chelsea will correct me if I'm wrong. Finally, people have neutral comments or questions about the proposal, either for or against, will have the opportunity opportunity to speak. City staff may then present

additional material and recommendations based on the testimony. And after each presentation, I may ask for questions from the commission. For anyone wishing to speak, we asking you to use the signup sheet there in the back that's been provided. And when you speak, you must state your name and address for the public record. We ask that each speaker limp themselves to no more than 3 minutes. Please remember that all presentations will be timed. You will be informed when your allotted time is expired. All speakers exceeding the time limit will be asked to immediately conclude his or her remarks. To minimize repetitive testimony, organizations are encouraged to only have one person speak for the group with other members showing their support. Each person may testify only once unless called back to the podium at the request of a planning comming commission member. Thank you for your cooperation. Okay. Now, this is for our part for the conflict of interest exparte contact or bias. And again this is the one for the economic opportunity analysis. The planning commission is required to disclose any conflicts of interest and exparte contacts we may have had with the proposal or applicant. That is whether we have any financial or other personal interest in proposal. Whether we have spoken with anybody about the proposal outside this hearing. Anybody have any disclosures? I'm seeing a bunch of head shaking. No. Okay. So I'm not supposed to read this part. If none move on to the next part. So um are there now this is to you guys are there any challenges from the audience tonight uh as to conflicts of interest expartner contacts related to members of the planning commission. No no hands. Okay. Uh challenges made. Okay. Now to required statements. State law requires me to tell you a number of things at the beginning of the hearing. First, the applicable substantive criteria that

apply to this application are contained in the notice of public hearing, the written staff report, and will be identified and discussed in the oral staff report. Second, your testimony, arguments, and evidence must be directed towards these criteria or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or development code that you believe apply to this application. Third, failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker or other people an opportunity to respond may preclude an appeal of a decision if this application based on uh appeal of a decision on this application based on that issue. Okay. Planning commission will make a recommendation to the city council for a final decision. A decision of the city council may be appealed to the land use board of appeals otherwise known as luba. All right. So now we get down to the meat of it. Everybody wrapped an attention here. So we will now hear from the staff applicant who will go over the staff report. Miss Schneider.

Yes. Thank you vice chair Terry. Um welcome everyone tonight. The as mentioned we our first item on the agenda is what we call a legislative text amendment proposal. In this case it's related to amending our comprehensive plan to do two things. one, adopt the updated 2025 economic opportunities analysis, and two, to amend chapter 7.5, the economic element of the comprehensive plan to align with that updated u what we call an EOA. So, as mentioned, planning commission won't make any decisions tonight. They hold a public hearing to make a recommendation to city council. City Council is tentatively scheduled to conduct their um public hearing in November. In summary, real briefly, the proposal will repeal and replace the EOA that was completed in 2009. So, this is almost 20 years later. We're required to update that. And that that uh document starts at page 22 of the PDF or the packet for the agenda tonight. It also amends the comprehensive plan that starts at page four of the PDF packet. Again, those amendments are purely related to aligning with the updated EOA. So, a little bit of background. Um the city is required under Oregon statewide um planning goals to maintain a 20-year supply of industrial commercial lands. And we do this by regularly at least once every 20 years looking at um the economic landscape completing an economic opportunities analysis and then um amending our comprehensive plan

accordingly. So the goal is to boost economic development potential of and better transportation connections throughout the project area. We actually have been working on this project for over the past year. There's been lots of um public hearings. Planning commission, city council hold joint work sessions. There was a public advisory committee who met uh on multiple occasions. It consisted of residents, property owners, business owners, affected agencies. They provided input. Additional stakeholder feedback was obtained through one-on-one interviews and focus groups. There was an online community survey that gathered additional feedback. Um the draft proposal that's in the before planning commission tonight incorporates all feedback to date and the proposed amendments are in line with the statewide planning goal and ensure our economic element of our comprehensive plan is in line with the updated EOA. So, as of today, Commissioners, I um received one written comment that's before you. I believe we may have additional comments that you'll hear tonight. The the one written comment received, I did not have a lot of time to look into um review it. Our public notice does say written testimony is to be submitted the Friday before public hearing. Of course, I wouldn't say that we disclude it, but submitting it and the nth hour gives us little time to review. What I did notice was the comments were directed at uh references to the uh ports shipping container project.

I'll just call out that we this the EOA is not intended to um do anything like to support that project other than to acknowledge that it is in it is a potential project out in the landscape that could affect the city's economic opportunities. And so it is considered in there and I think the city um through that public engagement determined yes we acknowledge that could be coming. We acknowledge that there's potential impacts but we don't want to base our EOA solely on that. So it it doesn't it acknowledges it but it also accounts for a cruise bay that we want to be resilient economically one way or the other. So you have the full full um staff report in front of you. Uh coun or planning commission can certainly make a recommendation

here. It's um to council to approve the land use application and to adopt the proposed amendments. Um, before doing any of that, you'll want to take public comment and ask questions as needed. Okay. So, we opened up Sorry. So, we're opening up for public comment at this point in time. Is that correct, Mr. Nabel? Yes. Thank you. So, does anybody wish to come to the podium and speak? There are at least two

two 114. So I have an Ashley Aki. Did I spell that? Did I say that right? I'm sorry if I did not. You actually really didn't say that right. Awesome. I say that because a lot of people butcher that one. Um, come up now. Make test.

All righty. Well, good evening. Uh, my name is Ashley Aiki and I work with the U climate justice organization Ro Climate that has an office here in downtown Kuz Bay. Thank you for the opportunity to make comment this evening on the land use application that seeks to replace the 2009 economic opportunity analysis with the recently conducted 2025 version. We applaud the city of Kus Bay for um taking the time to host a committee, conduct surveys and more devel to develop an economic analysis that meant to reflect the future growth for the region. While agree while we agree with general goals that include to strengthen and diversify the local economy, we must ask for a continuence due to the goal 3.9 that was um to support the CS uh port of Kus Bay and its development of dot dot dot to develop a DEF draft channel. Um this within the comprehensive plan goal and associated policies may have implications for how to effectively evaluate future permit applications. This expresses bias for projects that are listed in the EOA such as the Pacific Coast Interotal Project. We request the city of Kusbay to exclude this specific language from policies in the document as developing a deep draft channel may have impact may impact goals. Um the EA um language that to suggest that there could be upwards of 9,400 regional jobs um from the PET project that appears to be specul speculative without any any citations to support this number. As statewide planning guidelines suggests EAS are meant to focus on concise needs and trends for economic development. As the PCIP currently stands, the project is not fully designed, nor started the

permit process. PAP is expected to apply for goal exceptions in future permit processes regarding statewide plan goal 16 because the PAP is at odds with the Kuzbay estuary management plan. It would be irresponsible for the city of Kuzbay to approve goal 3.9 as currently stands. Existing industries such as commercial and recreational fishing, tourism, conservation, and more depend on a healthy estuary. The cruise estuary is considered to be the nursery bed for the fish and shelters industries and acts as a carbon sink. A healthy estuary protects our coastline and nearby communities from the impacts of flooding and extreme storms, making this region a climate refuge for people seeking relief from wildfire and smoke that were highlighted in the analysis. Developing a deep draft channel would have irreversible impacts on essential habitats, cultural resources, and nearby communities. Robust tribal consultation and further study is needed to understand the full scope of these impacts to the local estuary. This draft EA fails to address the economic harm that this development could bring on generations of coastal industries like fishing and tourism. And um just want to wrap this up with the um that we encourage the um city of Kuz Bay um to refine goal 3.9 language to not list with the develop a deep deep draft channel um in order to adopt the two um 2025 EOA. And um I know I left out a couple parts from my full comment, but I have a written copy to submit here. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. And you that was specific to goal number 3.9. Is that my understanding? Okay. And Miss Naval, just so I'm understanding this correctly, as I'm looking at the redline version of the draft of those comprehensive text amendments, and specifically, I guess I'm looking at page what is that? 122. Um, I'm looking at page 116 of the PDF.

Okay. Let me see if I can maybe my reader doesn't, but it's the one that has goal and has little boxes there. Yep. Okay. Yeah. And so that's all new language that's in this new EOA. Correct. Correct. The existing goals and policies are being updated where there's strike through that's removed, right? Underlined, added. Yep. Okay. Thank you.

Commissioners have any comments on that particular comment or questions I guess for Miss Aki? Anybody? No. All right. So, thank you, Miss Aki. We appreciate your um input there. So, I have a Craig Culie who has a question mark next to his name. I was I just didn't know what we were talking about. I thought it had something to do with my neighborhood. Oh, okay. Well, all right. If you want to speak, now's your time. I pass. Thank you, though.

Okay. Uh next, looks like we have a Christine Moffett. This is kind of hammer on us here. Um, thank you for the opportunity to comment today. I've given a I have written text that I will read. There's um other issues that certainly could be addressed. Um the first things I want to talk about the draft report uh and point out that uh there are many elements that are well presented and but there are points of omission and points with incorrect details. Some of the incorrect details are important to the outcome of the focus areas and revised plan. The PCIP project is mentioned at various places in the document as if this do document of development is fully fleshed out and on its way to creation. It is not. There have been no economic assessment of the proposal and the various job numbers are placed into the report. There are numbers provided in this document that are different from those that are provided in documents that are available as part of submissions to the US Army Corps of Engineers. Page two of the attachment A quotes, "The Port of Cuz Bay has plans to develop a 2.3 mill billion shipping container facility project supported by the governor's office with a recently approved 100 million grant from the Oregon legislature." That is not correct. HB506 included authorization to issue 100 million of general obligation bonds for the Kuzbay modification project, but the

accompanying SB550 outlined specific requirements to be met before the bonds could be issued. They were risked with completion of the environmental impact statement for the project issuance of final report of decision through the NEPA process. Additionally requiring that the Oregon in international ports bay or private entity engaged in public partnership with the po public private partnership with the port has closed on a re uh railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing loan through build America bure bureau in the amount of at least $1 billion or has secured equivalent page um uh I I I of the attachment A uh the potential expansion of the PCIP addresses that the city should plan to leverage the expansion and potential employment as a key opportunity. This is an endorsement of the concept before the entire plan is provided. There was a recent strategic planning exercise conducted and there are a lot of push back on this project. the community of empire and I've spoken to you before about empire um has been concerned. Anyway, I I think there needs to be a careful assessment of every part of this proposed um document before um that that any approvals are made. Um I include elements that have already been addressed in terms of the numbers of jobs. Um when we go the final thing and and it's on on the last page is that goals five and six from your 2009 plan have two important things. Goal five was to recruit sustainable industries and

and industries that provide green collar jobs. Goal six was also maximum use of Kuzbay unique geographic and recreational assets and cultural heritage. I think both of these are completely diluted in the proposed amendments as they've been included. Um, and you again have heard me talking about the importance of the holler in place and all these other cultural things. So, um, I know my time is up. The written comments are there and I'm available for any questions you might have. I urge a careful reading of this document.

Okay. So, oops. Specifically, I I obviously I haven't read in detail your written comments, but what I'm looking at, you have page three, page level three, the lies, and then page 24. I guess what I'm trying to figure out here is laser focus directed at this document. Are there what parts are you specifically concerned with

that? Those are some quotes. There are other points that I was hoping to get through this in three minutes, but I can I can highlight the other elements where there's a discussion um about PCIP with incorrect information. Okay. Hold on. Is there writing utensils? Thank you. and that and that's the statement that I made and and in my document to you the italicized uh information after I say that is not correct. Um this is this is completely from the public record.

I I got that. So, but the PCIP and basically I'm just trying to understand your argument. The PCIP issues, you have an issue with the with the support in this document for the PCIP project.

Correct. Inaccurate information. They they don't have $100 million in their hands. Okay. And then a careful assessment as as was already pointed out in terms of the job numbers. I mean when you when you look at jobs that are quoted, where's the assessment? Where's the um analysis of that? Where's the reference to those jobs? Can you point out to me where these job numbers are? Page 24.

Page 24. Okay, very good. Hold on. Give me a moment. It says port officials estimate the expansion will generate approximately 9400 jobs including 2500 terminal workers, 6,900 indirect jobs and and uh 2600 construction jobs. Those those numbers have not been um shown in any detail whatsoever. And then I point out that the 2.3 billion that's quoted throughout the document. Give me one second. It takes me a while to scroll through this thing. Oh, yeah. I know it it's a long read.

Yeah. No, my the the PDF numbering and the base numbering doesn't exactly. Yeah. So, I was giving you the page numbers. So, that's page 45 dates.

Well, it's the document number. Page 24. Yeah. Doc number 24 and also on that page and throughout the document a 2.3 billion is mentioned but there's a 4.3 billion estimate provided in documents provided to the US Army Corps of Engineers and I could give you th those numbers but it's not in this document. when it was provided to the Army Corps of Engineers. In what what context was it provided to the Army Corps of Engineers?

The there's um a complete uh incomplete because they're close to putting in environmental assessment now, but those those documents are all available on the web pipe of the Port of Cuz Bay under um the estuary um alterations. And I could give you I could give you that we've there's various points in that that give different numbers for but the um the numbers given to the Army Corps of Engineers are almost twice that what's in this document.

Okay. And when you say numbers given to the Army Corps of Engineers, numbers given by who? To the Army Corps of Engineers? The port. Okay. All right. And then and then I mention again that on that page 25, which is another number in the PDF, but it the 100 million comes in again as if it was a done deed, and it's not correct. It's incorrect.

Okay. One other thing that I wanted to ask you about in your the um italicized portion on the first page of your written document here where it states, "Additionally, it requires the Oregon International Port of Cousay or private entity engaged in a public private partnership with the port has closed on a railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing loan through the build America bureau blah blah blah blah blah." What? What? That's in the statute that was signed by the governor. Which one? Uh that's 5505. I think I could I could follow up on that, but No, it's fine. Okay.

But again, it to me it's just misinformation that it's not correct. All right. All right. Thank you, ma'am. I have no further questions from you. Thank you. So apparently there is a Dr. Hannah Epstein online that would like to make a public comment if possible. I do not have the technological knowhow to do that but hopefully the people to my right not my immediate right but to my right to do is speak if you allow. Miss or Dr. Epstein, can you hear us? Yes, I can hear you. Can you hear me?

We can hear you. So uh you're now on the record. Um, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak uh with you all today. I'm Dr. Hannah Epstein speaking on behalf of Oregon Shores um who's based out of Kus Bay. Or Shores is a statewide nonprofit with constituents in Kus Bay and our mission is to increase the resilience of coastal and estrine ecosystems and communities. They're really active in phase one of the Kus Estray management plan and continue to engage in matters regarding Kus coastal environments. So our comments today actually do follow on from the previous comments regarding the added language on port modifications. Um but economic opportunities analysis focus on hypothetical channel modifications and container terminal considered um by the QCPA and we feel this is really misplaced. There um is currently no evidence or support for the claims made about the project or the instituted benefits. For example, the analysis claims that port expansion could provide these 90 at 9,400 regional jobs. Um, citing these conversations with staff at the court for that number. Um, but there's no evidence or concrete analysis to support the number on the record. Um, which is in violation of the city's obligation to base it land use decisions on substantial evidence under statewide land use 9 and associated regulations. Economic opportunity analyses are supposed to be based on concrete and needs for industrial development. Focusing so much on the analysis associated plan amendments on a speculative project such as this that would require multiple amendments to the city's comprehensive plan to be allowable um is not consistent with those requirements. There's no dispute that the channel modification mentioned by the analysis and the comprehensive plan amendments are not consistent with the Tuesday compreh comprehensive plan and the estray management plan and for that reason the channel modification will require at least an exception to

the statewide library use 16 before it can move forward and as we saw the successful appeal of similar channel modifications for the Jordan code LMG project there's a good chance that such an exception cannot be granted so with the proposed Comprehensive plan amendments that reference the channel observation are attempting to do is to provide support in the comprehensive plan for a project that is inherently at odds of the plan before moving forward with specific approval process. This again is in clear violation of the duties of the statewide plan use system. The city cannot engineer policies favorable to a specific development project before it's considered whether the development project is consistent with the plan. And so we do request that the planning commission remove references to the channel modification and contain a terminal project in the economic opportunity analysis and the associated comprehensive plan amendment. Um, that's all I have. Thank you so much for the opportunity to testify today.

Okie do. Any questions for Dr. Epstein? Anybody? Dr. Epstein, what are you a doctor of? That's a great question. I'm a marine biologist. Excellent. Where are you? Where are you sitting right now when you're speaking to us? I'm actually sitting in Newport. Okay. Yeah. And what was the name of your organization again, please? I'm born in Shores. I'm It's a nonprofit of some sort, I'm assuming. Yes, we're a conservation nonprofit based out of Spain.

All right. And again, your I think like all the comments so far, your main objections to the language of this economic opportunity and analysis have to do with the the PCIP. Yeah, it's the language and support. Okay. All right. Thank you, Dr. Epste. We appreciate it. Thank you.

See, got to look at my agenda here. Make sure I don't Well, we didn't really I kind of messed that up. That's okay. It's all written down there. Um I guess we don't have any neutral people opposition support. Anybody else want to talk about uh the economic opportunity analysis? All right. anything from the staff?

Yeah. Um uh so we're hearing uh comments that suggest this economic opportunities analysis is heavily weighted dependent on the PCIP. Wow, that is not an accurate reflection of the e updated EOA andor the process that led here. It was actually um very thoughtfully considered to be we know it's a potential out there and we do have every right to consider it as a potential out there. We would be uh not doing the city any justice to to ignore it. These are 20-year plans. Um, and so for example, the jobs, there's references to 9,000 jobs. This plan, uh, on page 39 of the PDA DF packet calls out that only 600 to,200 of those total jobs are actually being attributed to Kous County. So, even fewer to the city of Kousbay. the way that these numbers are um developed, there's nothing that you can put a pinpoint on how many jobs in the city of Kuzbay will receive. But there was lots of conversation with the port, lots of conversation with the economic um agencies of the state regarding this this whole thing. And so I would just caution while I understand um that there are many who are on one side or the other in support or not support of a potential PCIP project. This economic opportunities analysis stands alone and separate from that. It is not a document in and of itself that would allow that project to move forward. Um, as you heard, there are many other permits and processes, land use actions that would need to take

place in order for that to happen. So, this document is, you know, a year's plus worth of engagement with planning commission, council, uh, stakeholders, public to say what is the realistic potential for our needs over the 20-year planning period. And to do that, we considered the PCIP project because it is out there as a potential in the horizon. Um, so I will say that there was comment about removing references to the Empire District, but those were really replaced with broader just general support of our businesses. So it doesn't deflect from supporting the Empire District. Uh to the contrary, the city is very much supportive of both the Empire District, the downtown and our other core areas. Um if there are any other com questions commission would like to ask, want more information on specifically be happy to try to answer those

specifically we have to make our goal our job is to make recommendation to the city council. Correct. Yeah. What what what are what is it though that that we are supposed to um be recommending

uh whether or not you would recommend approval denial whatever your recommendation is for the pro for adoption of the updated economic opportunities analysis. So that's the planning document that you've heard lots of talk about and also recommendation as to what we should do with the text amendments that come with that the comprehensive plan policies that the city would have set up established. I thought it was just going to be that when we talk about employment, we talk about opportunities and we talk about growingly the the lumber and logging industry that we've had. I spent 10 years about 40 years ago u hiring people for five warehouses and then five for international paper garden. And I guess kind of my point here is that of those I don't know four or 6,000 people that I had hired in that period of time and uh in the in warehouser itself there were 1500 people working. Now none of those people have a job here that I'm aware of. I mean if it is I mean there was a guy in that who was reading my water here one day. You know the point is there's was a huge change in our in our economic picture. We go back a little ways and we look fondly at those those good old days. Huge amount of people just don't work here, don't live here anymore. And I think that's why when we I think we need to be very cautious when we look at new projects to make sure that we don't

that we temper our concerns with the reality of of what's really there in Kuspay's history and future. Um, you know, I'm not certainly an expert on this stuff. I mean, a lot of it right over my head and I'm not in the business anymore, but I do know that a bunch of those people don't work here anymore and never never work in those industries again. So uh people who work in that industry now are I don't know I don't know the numbers but it's fragile tiny. So I guess my comment is just for us to be careful and not uh throw the proverbial baby out with a bathwater u when we consider future opportunities for cous knowing that no matter what we do u something's not going to be quite right. Uh and then they talk about hiring people and how many people were you know supposed to be hiring I can tell you from starting large with products plant up in gardener when I started it's all gone now it's in green field you know we probably hired sub substantially more people than we thought we were in our wisdom as we made the plans for that for what it's worth just some comments about from an old goop guy thank So, Mel, the uh this what we're doing here, exhibit one, the economic opportunity analysis, if we approve it and say great, we recommend the city council approve this. What impact will this document have in the future?

This document is simply a planning document for the city to help us forecast our needs for economic growth and our needs for uh land to provide for industrial commercial development. And if we adopt this document as it is, it's not going to set anything to say that we have to deny this application based on the economic analysis.

Correct. It it does not in any way um suggest that we have to do anything with respect to the port project. It suggests that we are working side by side with the port and supportive of expanded opportunities in um Kousbay and that is you know there's always a balance. There's the economic side. We do our environmental estuary planning through the estuary management plan. That's a whole another piece that will have to be dealt with. Um, but this doesn't set anything in stone. This is purely a planning document. It's based on information received at a point in time. We understand this project isn't ready to go today and it might change in the future. It's purely a planning document based on the best available knowledge at the time it was created. Um, and it's a requirement to do this. And if some substantial something substantially changes in the future, we could come back and amend it, but it doesn't hold us to anything. The policies are policies there in line with what council um has said they're supportive of, and that's just a guiding a guiding document. So if we approve this document as it is and and in five years the court says we want to build a huge higher fire in the middle of downtown Goose Bay we can say no

right if it is not allowed in the zone in which it would be developed if it's not allowed maybe if it's impacted by the estuary management plan it's not allowed then yes we could say no this doesn't mean we have to say Yes. Right. And so if there is something in the proposed PCIP that strikes the city as not kosher, then we don't have to agree and go along with the court. Correct. It's a study. I mean, that's what we basically state the state law that says we have to do this every so often. Correct.

And we paid how much money? We received a $50,000 grant from the Ford Family Foundation to complete this work. Okay. So, thank you Ford family and they had done this whoever consultants were out somewhere. They Yep. Echo Northwest. Echo Northwest. They did this. They need to be from somewhere else to believe.

You would believe me. Sorry. Um, all right. And now going on to exhibit two. I think. Let me get to it here. Whoops. The comprehensive plan proposed text amendments. Can you just explain the impact of the proposed text amendments in exhibit two?

Yes. So these are our econom the vision for the city economic vision, right? And then it sets forth the goals that we are striving for. And I'm just going to read them out loud. Strengthen and diversify the local economy. So that's diversify. Strengthen, right? It's not just singularly focused. Make Kuzbay a destination to invest and work in. Align land use and infrastructure with economic priorities. Foster strategic partnerships and regional collaboration. And so as you go through that, there's the policies that are how the council would operate and when they're making decisions. And so this would be their guiding guiding document when you know trying to make a decision about strengthening diversifying the local economy etc.

Okay. So the the concerns that Miss Moffett identified in particular and about the language not being 100% accurate in this does that have any if it was included and it is inaccurate what would the effect be?

Nothing. As I said, it's a point in time gathering of data. And so at the point in time when this data gathering was taking place, those were the um that was the information. And not of all of what is being stated is accurate. Like I said, we're not attributing 9,000 jobs to Kuse Bay. We're attributing maybe 600. I hope not. We know that's not a reality for the city itself. um we know you know whether or not the project costs 2.3 billion or 4.3 billion has no bearing on our economic opportunities analysis. Okay. So

what kind of timeline constraints I mean when do we have to have or when does the city I mean we're we're just we're like an appendix you know kind of useless really. So when um but when does the city council have to have this done by? So the city council is tentatively scheduled to hear it I believe on November 2nd or 4th and so that would be the on the 4th. Okay. The goal to have a recommendation before that time.

And is there any constraint put on by the statute as far as when we have to have this done? Um, no. It's well, it's we need to amend our EOA to get the 20-year supply updated information. So, you and we're coming up on that time frame. We through this process, it's a legislative process, we could drag it out indefinitely, you know, and but is that what's best for the city of Kbay? Sure. Anybody else? Anything else? Chelsea? Um,

I don't think so. It's just a just to reiterate that this is a requirement for the city. It is an economic opportunities analysis. um projects large projects such as the PACIP should be considered. We we would be doing oursel a disservice not to consider it. Again, it is not the weight is not on that project. This EOA is considering many other things. Lots of data gathering conversations, community input was had over the last year. If the information on the dollar amount of the project changes, that doesn't affect the EOA. Um the policies in the comprehensive plan don't constrain constrict the city to doing one taking one simple action, right? Things can change. We need updates to the estuary management plan, separate process. Updates to zoning code, separate process. None of that is a part of tonight's proposal. So this um while there's been lots of focus on the PCIP project, this is the city's comprehensive economic opportunities analysis uh that we're we're looking at and asking for a recommendation on.

Okay. Anything else from the commissioners? Okay. So, I think we can close the public hearing now unless somebody else has a any other comment they just wanted to get off their chest. All righty. Excuse me while I turn the page on my script. I now close the public hearing the record at 6:52 p.m. All right. Now, commissioners, all four of us who attended tonight's meeting, it is our time to deliberate. And I think Chelsea has pretty succinctly told us what we can do. We can say yay, nay, continue, or we can say yay with these recommendations. But as we've discovered in however many years that at least the four of us have been on here, what we say doesn't really carry much weight. So, can do whatever we want. Um Jack Mr. Chair make a motion miss this particular case to make a motion that the city council approve land use application based on the information presented by the applicant and recommended findings of approval. All right, I'll second it.

Second. Bill second. Okay, second. Seconds. Any discussion? Deliberation. Well, I think that what we just sandwiched this is is indeed still a study. It's not, you know, we had a stamp down and said, "Yeah, go ahead and build it, guys." That's not what this is. This is a if we we didn't continue to study it then we well we'd be cutting ourselves up from opportunity might be good. We don't know until the studies complete

right and as far as I can tell based on my own experience and what Mabel just said this is a document that's a bunch of recommendations and a bunch of lofty goals. It's not it's nothing that if they cross over the line no one's going to court it. you know, it's nor I guess it wouldn't be court, it would be Tuba or something like that. So, while I appreciate the concerns and especially the what Miss Moffett identified because inaccurate information annoys me when things are inaccurate, um I don't see any reason to to make any changes at this point in time because like Miss Schnaval said, this is just a snapshot in time. things change. And frankly, what this sounds like to me, it's something that Salem invented. Well, the people in Salem said that we had to do this. I don't know when the law was passed, probably in the 70s or something like that. And so now we have to do these studies every so year. So a bunch of people get together and make money doing, you know, 50,000 bucks, I guess, uh to put this together and then we approve it and then we go, "Yay!" We put this on our wall and it's going to be like that picture over there. You know, it's going to have about that much authority. So, and

but it is indeed a piece of of part of the evidence that would be used. Yes. In the future, whether something is either approved or not approved and meaningful this document is part of that part of that decision making process.

I mean, and most of what I see here is pretty I mean, how do you argue with maintain and implement an economic development plan that identifies clear actions and partnerships to recruit and locate a diverse range of businesses and industries in Kate? I mean that's most of these statements in here are fairly I wouldn't say neutral but I mean they're not they're not saying one thing or another really support and exist support new and existing industrial businesses considering opportunity. I mean there's nothing in here that says you know make sure that there's no more bike paths and we all have more logging. I mean there just nothing like that. Right. So, I uh I mean I I don't see a reason to go against it really. Anybody else? All right, let's vote. All in favor of uh Mr. Marino's motion.

I died. Get that in. Okay. Um so, we recommend approval. I'm sorry, Mel. I didn't follow the script exactly right. Do I need to do anything else? Um, I think

the city council is scheduled to consider the planning commission recommendation during a second public hearing at the regular meeting on Tuesday, November 4th, 2025. There we go. Okie do. So, now the second So now this is the second one. This is about the mini stoages or self storage unit excuse me. I now open a public hearing on land use application number 187-25-000015-P is in Papa L is in Lima N is in November G is in G proposal to approve and adopt by ordinance text amendments to the Kuspay development code. Today is October 14th, 2025. It's 6:57 p.m. My name is Pat Terry. I am the planning commissioner's vice chair. The planning commission will make recommendations to the city council. That's we're doing recommendations only to the city council on this application. Based on the complete record, including the testimony received at tonight's hearing. These proceedings will be recorded. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with the Cuspay development code and state law. Specifically, city staff will present the comment or the staff report the recommendations. Public testimony. People will come up and talk. I supposed to be for and against and then neutral, but I really didn't follow that. I doubt that I'm going to follow at this time. So, you understand how that works. City staff may then present additional material and recommendations based on public testimony after each uh presentation. I can ask for comments from the four of us up here. We ask that each speaker limit theselves no more than three minutes. Um, please remember that all presentations will be timed. You'll be informed your time is expired. the speakers exceeding their time limit will be asked to immediately conclude his or her remarks. But as the vice chair and the guy leading this, I'll let you ramble on for a little bit because there's not many people speaking. To minimize repetitive testimony,

organizations are encouraged only to have one person speak. Um, each person may testify only once unless called back to the podium at the request of the planning commission member or to respond to a question. Thanks for your cooperation. Conflicts of interest, exparte contact or bias. The planning commission is required to disclose any conflict of interest exparte contacts that we will have the proposal applicant. That is of whether we have any financial or other personal interest in the proposal and whether we have spoken with anybody about the proposed uh about the proposal outside of this hearing. Does anybody have any disclosures to make? I do. Um, I'm a director of I'm on the board of directors of a corporation that owns many stoages units. None in the city of Cous Bay yet. Maybe never depending how this goes. I'm also on the board of directors of another organization that um uh well, Shore Pines Bay Village. It's a uh manufactured home facility located on Ocean Boulevard and we have about 40 acres out back that um is developable and you know considering different ideas and that self storage is obviously occurred to us especially for our people that live there. Um I will say that is a nonprofit organization and all of our profits are donated mostly to local organizations once a year. So, that's my conflict of interest, but nobody else. Okay. Anybody want to challenge me and kick me off of this decision-m thing right now?

None of you guys. Nope. Vice Chair, can you make a impartial decision? Yeah, I think I can. Thank you.

I guess I was supposed to read that to myself, wasn't I? Okay. Well, thank you, Commission, for guiding me through that. Okay. State law requires me to tell you a number of things at the beginning of the hearing. First, the applicable substantive criteria that apply to this application are contained in the notice of public hearing, the written staff report, and will be identified and discussed in the oral staff report. Second, your testimony, arguments, and evidence must be directed towards these criteria or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or development code that you believe apply to this application. Third, failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker or other people an opportunity to respond may preclude appeal of a decision on the application based on that issue. Um, the planning commission will make a final recommend or make a recommendation to the city council for a final decision. A decision of the city council may be appealed to the land use board of appeals, also known as Luba. Okay, so now we get the staff report.

Yeah. Thank you, Vice Chair Terry. So again, planning commission is making a recommendation to council. The proposed text amendments in summary really come down to adding a new definition for mini storage and expressly prohibiting mini storage facilities in um across all our zone districts where they're not already uh expressly prohibited. Uh council some background council identified self- storage unit facilities as a type of development that must be restricted to protect our city's limited supply of commercial and industrial lands. We just talked about the updated economic opportunities analysis that finds we have a deficit of those land areas and the city um council has identified they would like to prioritize development types that bring jobs, housing, active streetcapes and increased assessed property values. And so this is why they've moved forward with this proposal. Uh, of note, all existing facilities would be allowed to remain and be maintained. Um, the proposed amendments are in line with the city's comprehensive plan. They're in line with statewide planning goals. You've got the full agenda staff report in front of you. I've heard from multiple property owners in this case. Uh, lots of people called, came in, asked questions. None were in opposition to date. I called out those uh in support and those neutral in the staff report. In addition to this, I received one more who was in support of the proposal. Um again, ask questions, but commission the planning commission can recommend make a recommendation

uh approval, denial, changing it up however you would like. And uh council is tentatively scheduled to hear this on November 4th. It amazes me that we have this where we came up with this horrible hatred of storing mutants. I mean

they're quiet. Uh nobody's bothered by it. That requires minimal police protection. And some places that we have, some of this property we have doesn't have much of might be hard to find a use. Other than that, um I don't know. I I'm just seems to me like u there it's not the worst sort of of a development that come to a to a piece of property in our fine city.

Comment what what precipitated the city not coming to the planning commission first and asking this question. Was there some did somebody come to the city to develop a project that would all of a sudden change the flavor of Kous Bay? Or is it just what what the motivation?

What's the reason? Yeah, like I said, it's they just identified that type of development as having as not being one that uh meets their economic development goals. And so, so, so the council actually sat there and said, "We don't like self storage projects." That that was their thoughts. Just right. I can't tell you the exact impetus but in a council meeting they identified and discussed it and directed staff

to move that forward and so this is plan their involvement of planning commission through the process. Okay. So this is for a limited period of time correct? No. Incorrect. Forever.

It would change the code until the code was changed again. So some of comments that self storage facilities do not provide jobs. Excuse me. What? Well, first of all, there's contractors. One, two, there's management companies. There's people that actually go out and repair these facilities. I do you want me to explain that in more detail, Jeff? Yes.

Yeah. I mean, um, at least Yeah. There's people, there's contractors, there's maintenance companies, there's um when when a storage unit is auctioned off, there's people that come in and buy these things and sell them in the secondhand stores, you know, that go through there and clean them out. Um there's people that workers that clean things out, that clean out the storage units. there's um money paid to the well like I said the contractors and as well as it supports a lot of family-owned businesses I mean that I am aware of in this area um and they pay taxes

and yeah considerable amount of taxes so so let's let's just Jeff Jeff hold on a second we're getting off of our script we're supposed to ask for public comment first okay let's let's do that correct all right we're All right. Let the record show I hit Jim on the arm with a pen. So, uh, Mr. Vern Hers is the first person for public comment. Do you want to say something, Mr. Hers? Uh, originally the computer said it was 8 minutes and 27 seconds. I wasn't aware if I would be limited to three. Can you

I Well, I'm going to use my um discretion in here. Depends on what you say, I guess.

Okay, great. Um I'm Vern Hers. Uh I own Empire Mini Storage. Um the the city council and when they created the moratorum, they said that they had they had enough mini storage facilities. I don't think they had any. Um the mayor was asked I called them and asked for a copy of the report from a study that they most certainly must have performed to come to that conclusion that there are enough. He contacted uh uh Chelsea Schneaval, a non-elected and appointed person, and she indicated that she did not repair a report. Instead, she verbally reported to the city council. Her information was from researching the ratios of other cities. Ratios of other cities have nothing to do with reality in Kouspay. Cousay storage facilities are usually completely full and get or keep getting multiple phone calls daily asking for availability. So her reason for the moratorum is not accurate. Um a quote from the moratorium resolution. Whereas with limited and readily buildable land, consideration should be on the highest and best use of each parcel focused on greatest community need and ability to produce property tax revenue for the assessed value of the developed parcel. So they want more money and the community actually needs more storage facilities. Uh, and the city council basically wants to hinder that. Uh, if you need a place to put your belongings because you got beat up by your significant other, good luck. And that happens a lot. If you are moving here and need a place to put your things uh while waiting to get your into your new home, good luck. Many people in Kous Bay needing local storage end up

having to store their belongings in Roseberg because they can't get it here. And those who want to engage in free enterprise have the right to invest in what they believe will provide them with a reasonable reasonable return. And if they fail, so be it. America is fundamentally based on a free enterprise system which is a market-based economic model characterized by private ownership, volat voluntary exchange competition and limited government intervention. Entrepreneurs are incentivized to innovate and take risks which we do with a potential for profit serving as a major driver of economic activity. The government plays a limited but essential role by enforcing contracts and protecting property rights. If this prohibition goes into effect and a needed industry is prohibited, who's next? Um, I suspect that the warehouse, not a mini storage facility that U-Haul put in, um, is being counted as 650 storage units. But we need more. People need more facilities. I have no interest in building more. I'm 74. I'm done. But I run this. I designed it, built it, and I run it. And and when you say that we can stay, we are permitted to stay. Gee, thanks. Any questions?

I have a question. Which Hold on. Hold on. This is for Mr. Her right now. We'll get to that later. Okay. Anybody questions for Mr. Hurst? Thank you, Mr. Appreciate it. Well, let's wait until this You want to write it down so you don't forget it? I will forget what kind of money I might block. Okay. Uh Mr. Ross.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Tom Ross. My address is 763 South Broadway. Um I am employed by U-Haul Company and I am asking that you either deny this application or continue it uh for a couple of reasons. One, I believe the change in the definition of the text is too broad. It it is listed as moving and storage parentheses self storage. Um, I've been in this industry in Kuz Curry, Douglas County, and it's my responsibility for you all to know just about every storage operator, their current occupancies, what's available and what's not. I do that for several reasons. One reason is is I need to be able to forecast what we need for the truck sharing program for people coming into the area. I can tell you that there is not enough storage. The everyone in the area is either at maximum capacity or very near to it. Okay. So based on that, I'm asking for continuance either to get more information on the industry. I see nothing in this staff report that indicates any analysis was done considering occupancy and the need. Keeping in mind that storage is an essential service during the great recession of two 2009. It actually helped the city of Kuse Bay in many ways. One, the availability of sto storage units allowed for people who were losing their homes, not their jobs, to put their items in storage, consolidate households with other family members, and then return to business as normal when that bubble burst and remain in Kuzbay. I'm going to look also at the pandemic. It's an essential service. We had the same scenario basically occur.

People were trying to evade or run away from the pandemic, put their items in storage, go into refuge, and when that stopped, they returned back to Kuzbay to resume living. Okay. So, my my my goal here is is to keep in mind that as an essential service, we take care of the Coast Guard with the storage facilities. We have tons of Coast Guard personnel that use that product. Okay. Um, let me just jump into a quick note here that I wrote. Um, I don't think that the storage community at large here was adequately informed on the potential of this moratorum. I just don't believe that. I know Vern wasn't. I know that Monarch the Socias were not actively involved in it. as well. I believe we looking at your EOA, we found possible flaws in the actual amount of acreage based on the jobs that are needed. I'm not relying on that information as being accurate to make a supposition on whether this moratorum needs to be in place or not. And with that, I'll yield my time and thank you for the consideration.

Commissioners, any comment or questions for Mr. Hers? Ross. I'm sorry, Mr. Ross. That was Mr. Hers before. Sorry about that. Thank you, Mr. Ross. Appreciate it. Okay. Okie do. So, uh, written comments. I don't think we had any on this. Did we, Mr.? No. Okay.

Rebuttal from the staff. Um, I'll just say, uh, Mr. Ross suggested the storage community wasn't adequately informed. Every permitted, licensed, storage facility was mailed, uh, notice. So, I would respectfully disagree with that. Uh, mentioned the mayor said that my analysis was based on ratios of other cities. Well, I'll reiterate this is a council uh initiated text amendment, not a planning department initiated text amendment. My research was based on averages information but not ratios as compared to others. And then I'll just make note that the city of Kuz Bay um there's a need for storage. Yes. But the city of Kuz Bay can't provide that for the entire Northbend Kous County community. So just keeping that in mind.

Okay. My question is it said in their original discussion that they've had wanted to pro prohibit it in zones that it was currently allowed. Where what zones is it allowed in? What zones is it currently prohibited in? Where it's not expressly prohibited to make it clear. Well, which ones? I mean,

so our code currently the ones where commercial uses are already expressly prohibited are in our small lot residential, low density residential, lowdensity residential overlay and the watershed district. Okay. So the residential districts as whatever the wershed is yeah our medium density residential district it's not expressly prohibited and that would be an area like that'd be an area of higher density housing not commercial but not single family homes

right people would probably be using this stuff if it was there I think maybe I don't know I've never used one I I watched the show on TV though it's pretty interesting what they might find in there when they dig around. Uh I guess my thought on it is it seems pretty drastic to say that you're going to just prohibit it until the end of time and and just everywhere and like we're like we're really stamping out some kind of terrible blight on the community which is which it isn't. I mean, and as people have pointed out in my current role as a realer, people come, buy a house, come here, not ready, can't move in for couple weeks or whatever. They need a place to put their stuff. There's no question about that. Uh, and the the places that I'm aware of, many of them are quite quite attractive and for what they are. I mean, I think it kind of reminds me of uh have we have an office building downtown Bay and I remember various kinds of people were upset that we might have an office or some kind of something there other than a cute shop and that it turns out that it's hard shops are hard to to survive and so that's why we don't have more of them lining the streets of Kus. is made for everybody to enjoy. Um, and I think to me this falls into the the cute shop uh thing where it's it's it's not a cute shop, but it's a something that is uh has a need for people to build them and and be uh is you know, I mean is is must be justified in the mind of the person that's doing it and they must

there must be indeed or they wouldn't build them and the ones over there would be started. So anyway, that's my thoughts on it. Mr. Marino, I interrupted you when you were gone.

Yes, you did, but properly so. So that this comment about large increases in assessed values actually self- storage projects create some of the highest values per square foot out there for for that type of it's it's just way up the top which increases values and taxes for the city. It's a very big deal. I concur with the occupancy throughout Cousay. We recently did a self- storage project and the lady said, "We are 100% full. We talked to people in Myrtle Point Band Cous everybody's full. So there's demand here. I do think that there's particular areas of the city like the Empire Historic District and the Waterfront District that wouldn't be well suited for self storage. Downtown Cousay probably not. But what about the Pennies building? Can you imagine maybe a storefront, an interior self storage which would bring people into downtown? That building's going to sit there and sit there and sit there.

That's just one thought. The other space outside of these three particular areas well suited for self storage and U-Haul's stacking. So they they've taken a piece of property highest and best used and really elevated its its uh value. Plus it's stacked storage. It's just a a great it's I thought these guys know what they're doing with self storage. They're used to building in cities where the price of land is super high. It's great use of that piece of property. So I I I against this I I think we should table this and sort out where it would be appropriate to put them and maybe exclude them from other particular neighborhoods. a little bit more precise instead of just

absolutely scout. Yeah. Do we know do we know how many exist in the city of Kous Bay? Right now we have 13 facilities permitted and licensed.

Any other comments from the commissioners? Well, and I, you know, I agree with with Jeff. I mean, I think that I certainly would be voting for this today. You know, I think really getting better feel where where in fact things might be, you know, rather than say we're going to there's not going to be any more old time memorial. What happens if they tore one down? Would they not be able to build another one there? I mean, there's a lot of questions that aren't even addressed here. So, yeah, I think it's it's needs to be thought out a little better.

Okay, let's see. Actually, I kind of messed up on the order here. Are there any more public comments on this particular issue? Okay. So, I'm going to close the public hearing at this point and we've already kind of deliberated, kind of meld this all into one, but I am just a vice chair, so I can't be expect

Yeah, exactly. So, we'll close the public record uh the public hearing record at 7:24 p.m. We've already somewhat deliberated up here on the planning commission. I'm just going to say that um I'm from this area. Did go away for a while, but I'm from this area as is my father, as is my grandfather, as is my greatgrandfather. And um you know, I've seen just what I've seen since I was cognizant of things and the industry in this area changing from obviously the lumber dominated thing which my family worked in. Gosh, if you hired people at warehouse, you probably hired some of them. Sure.

Anyway, and um to what it is now, but in my in my normal job, I deal with people dying. I'm not a doctor. I'm a lawyer. We do probates. And oftent times, people out of town, um you know, the kids are out of town, mom and dad come here and pass away. Got to sell the house, got to get the stuff out of the house, got to find a storage unit. There's no storage units available. go to Reedsport. I don't want there's no availability up there either. So I do I just from my little perspective I see there being a need and the vacancy rates that Mr. Ross and Mr. Hers indicated I find consistent and find compatible with my anecdotal evidence that I have. And you know Cous Bay is in my is one of our industries is old people. No offense to the old people, but I mean we get a lot of people from California coming up here to retire. Um or just coming up here and I think that the storage units when mom has to move into assisted living, you got to clear out her house. You need someplace to put it. You don't want to just get rid of everything, have a garage sale. You need time. Um and I I agree with Jeff and I'm sorry, Mr. Marino and Mr. Berg. I believe that we should maybe continue this and um say tell the city council we're not ready to make a decision at this point in time on this unless we have some more information. And I will fully admit between the time that we got this application and now I have not had the time to really go through it. It was right in the middle of hunting season. So you know there's other things going on in my free time. So want to make a motion Mr. Marino. Can I real quickly when you make a motion to continue, I would suggest

setting it to a state certain and also providing staff with guidance on what zones you'd like to see them still allowed, not allowed?

Do you know when our next meeting possibly be? We're having a meeting on November 12th and a meeting on I believe the December 9th. November 11th. No, November 12th is the 11th is correct. Can we push it past? You can set it to January if you want.

Yep. Let's let's push it out. I think we need to it may may not be well suited to just state a particular zone if if we're it's it's easy to say the Empire waterfront district and this waterfront heritage district. Those are very specific areas. But beyond that, it might be tough to just say, well, let's include all IC zone properties. Uh so if we can spend some time trying to define a an area, this might create some problems for staff to do this, but try and get some consensus on the areas that we should include them and not include them. So, some physical boundaries, draw some maps. That's my recommendation.

And can I confirm the commission would like to continue this? Yeah.

For future uh recommendation to the January 13th, 2026 planning commission. I think that's what Mr. Marino's motion is, right? We're continuing this in the January 13, 2026 meeting and requesting that the the the planning commission does so to for her to deal with that thought, she might have to come back to us again. Can we continue it from that point forward for another 30 days? Yes. Okay. Good.

All right. So, I I guess the mo the motion has been made by Mr. Marino to continue this to the January whatever 13th 13 2026 meeting. Second. All in favor? I. All right. So, go to my other agenda now. on here.

Okay, so we've done that public hearings. Any comments from the planning commission about anything else? We're all talked out. Okay. Um, staff comments. Um, just a note that we'll have a special meeting, not on the regular Tuesday. It's on a Wednesday in November, November 12th, where we'll conduct another public hearing on proposed text amendments. All right. Very good. There's nothing else. The meeting's adjourned. Hey. Hey. Hey.