City Council - Regular Meeting

Yeah. Yeah. Good evening everybody. I'd like to invite Angela Mayor to the podium to pray us into the evening. Let's pray. Eternal and righteous God, the maker of heaven and earth, the one in whom every city finds its meaning and every people their hope. We gather here today mindful that no council, no government, and no community stands on its own wisdom alone. For the scripture reminds us that unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain. And so we pause in humility, asking that your presence would dwell among us in this place. Lord, we ask first for unity in a world so often divided by suspicion, fear, and misunderstanding. Teach us again that we belong to one another. Help the leaders of this city to see not adversaries across the table, but neighbors across the aisle. May every conversation be guided not by pride or rivalry, but by the shared desire to seek the common good of the people of Grant's Pass. We ask for truth in an age where voices compete and confusion abounds. Grant us the courage to pursue what is right rather than what is easy. Give these council members wisdom that rises above partisanship and clarity that cuts through the noise of our time. Let truth walk through these chambers like a steady light, exposing what must be corrected and illuminating what must be built. And Lord, we pray for your kingdom to come in this city. Not a kingdom of domination, but a kingdom of justice, mercy, and humility. A kingdom where the vulnerable are protected, where families can flourish, where businesses prosper with integrity, and where the stranger is treated with dignity. May Grant's Pass be a place

where righteousness and peace meet together. Bless the work done here tonight. Guide every decision, steady every heart, and remind us that leadership is not merely authority, but stewardship. Stewardship of people, of trust, and of the future. And when this meeting is over and these chambers grow quiet again, may the work done here echo in the lives of the people beyond these walls. We ask these things in the name of the God who calls us to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly. Amen.

Let's stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay. Okay. So, we're starting with the public hearing. This is um a continuation. Rob, yeah,

I would like to pull a item out of the consent agenda. Item A 5A. Like to have a little more discussion on that first 5A. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, we're starting with uh we'll first start we'll start with roll call. So, uh Eric. Yeah. Start with roll call. Here. Joel. Here.

Joel. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. And I think we have Rick online. Rick, are you there? Clear. Great. Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you. Okay. So, we got a continuation of public hearing that we uh started last meeting. And at this point, I'll turn it over to the staff. Thank you. Thank you, Council President and Council. This is a continuation. Wait,

uh Seth. Yeah. Yeah. I'm going to be recusing myself uh from this discussion. Um I do want to uh make it known though that this is not required by law. This is just out of a an abundance of caution for me. So just due to a public a potential conflict of interest. So thank you. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Um this is a continuation of a public hearing uh that you first heard a month ago. Um and it is uh to resolve a citizen complaint between Republic Services um and a customer. I'm not going to go through all of these slides, but as you recall, we did have a discussion about the franchise system and some of the benefits and how long it has been in place in Oregon. Um, and that the franchise agreements here in Grants Pass have been in place since the mid 1980s with major updates in the early 2000s and that was largely in part to the closure of the Merlin landfill. Limited exemptions do exist within the franchise agreements uh but do largely preclude the collection and transportation of solid waste for profit by any business in the franchise area that does not hold that franchise. The agreements do also specify dispute resolution procedures when a customer feels that the services provided are not in accordance with the agreements. And so where we are today is at 8.12 um which is if that dispute is unresolved the citizen may petition the city which they have done in writing for a hearing on the complaint. So the complaint is that Mr. Kurpatre has been prohibited from using the Merlin Transfer Station by Republic Services due to repeated violations of the franchise agreement. Mr. Mr. Kirkpatrick operates two businesses which he contend fit current exemptions within the franchise agreement which should void the prohibition of his ability to utilize the transfer station. So in his complaint against public services, Mr. Kirkpatrick did site exemptions 2.81, 2.87 and subsequently 2.89 which we will also talk about to qualify for that for one 2.81 uh Mr. Kirk Patrick must demonstrate that his businesses are private charitable

organizations and that the materials being collected and hauled are repairable or cleanable discards intended for reviews. In 2.87 um that is for recognizing a contractor registered under OS 701 and that is for hauling waste created in connection with the demolition, construction or remodeling of a building or structure. Um, and to qualify for that, Mr. Kirkpatre, uh, must be a general contractor, which he is. And the waste being hauled was created by and by demolition, construction, or remodeling of buildings or structures that he created or was working on. And that the waste generated was by him. Under 2.89, 89. And this is the one that I think we spent a lot of time talking about um at the last hearing. Uh the exactual exemption reads the transportation of solid waste by persons engaged in cleanup of property for the purpose of abiding a judicial order, preparing the property for sale, abating nuisances, or eliminating hazardous conditions. Um this exemption was originally created for the transportation of solid waste in order to abide to judicial order as part of uh code enforcement operations. The exemption language in Republic Services City of Grants Pass agreement is broader and does infer that solid waste could be hauled to prepare a property for sale regardless of whether a judicial order was involved. It is also important to note and this is in detail in your staff report. This language does only appear in the Republic services city of grants pass agreement. It is not in any of the four other agreements that are managed. So at the conclusion of the hearing on February 4th, city council did express concerns of limited due process with the franchises franchises be banning illegal haulers from the transfer station. Since then, uh legal council public works and

the franchise franchisees tongue twister did meet to draft a due process procedure because we agreed that was a lacking um in the franchise agreements. Council also suggested that Republic Services and Mr. Kirkpatrick meet and try to resolve this issue. Um, as it appeared that that step of the grievance process may have been missed or miscommunicated. So, Republic Services and Mr. Kirkpatrick did meet on February 10th. Discussions included Republic Services would lift the current ban and what would be allowed or not allowed under the franchise agreements and that Republic Services would help Connor uh set up an account to facilitate future hauling in accordance with the franchise agreements. As for due process, final details are being reviewed, but the general process will include that documentation would be required for all violations on which a ban is based. This includes photos, log of time and date, etc. There would be a written warning for a first violation. Second and subsequent violations would result in progressively longer bans, 90, 180 a year, something. We haven't worked out all of the language, but that's what our thinking is. And then the first ban may be lifted early by signing an acknowledgement of the rules of the franchise agreement that says, "Yes, I understand. I can only do these things." And then they would lift that ban early. Bans must be issued in writing with specifics and a copy must be provided to the solid waste agency. So it won't be handled in a vacuum anymore. There will be other people who are aware that a ban has been placed on a local business or person. Um and then appeals for bans or violating the franchise would be made to the solid waste agency. So the council's role is to hear additional testimony from Mr. Kirkpatrick and Republic Services and determine if the complaint is supported.

So tonight, because this is just a continuation, uh we're only providing five minutes for each to present additional information to you. And then following public comment, uh Mr. Kurpatre will be provided three additional minutes just to close it out if that something else came up, another argument that he wanted to respond to. Your call to action date is tonight. Um your alternatives are up there. we can find the complaint to be unfounded, uphold the complaint, or find the complaint mute as Republic Services has agreed to allow Mr. Kirkpatrick to return to the transfer station. And with that, unless you have specific questions for me, um I would open it up to Mr. Kirkpatrick to speak to you. That looks like no questions for me. Connor.

Hi. Thank you uh Connor Kpatrick. Um first I just wanted to say uh thanks thank you to staff for the report. I'm uh satis or pretty satisfied with the uh with the staff report and the uh the findings presented. Um I just wanted to um clarification on a couple other points. Um so the staff report clarified that my activities uh fall within the 2.89 exemption. um if I'm preparing a property for sale. I just wanted to also clarify that in that same exemption is uh abating a nuisance. Um so when I for example when I am cleaning up illegally dumped trash that's um been dumped on the side of the road and it's a public nuisance. Um I'd like to be able to clean up that trash and that's a voluntary service. It's a voluntary public service. I'd like to be able to bring up bring that trash to the transfer station and I believe that fits in that uh abating a nuisance part of that uh exemption. Um again, I'm happy with the uh preparing property for sale exemption. I just want maybe further clarification on the evading a nuisance portion. Um and then uh let's see what else was I going to say? Um, oh, also, um, I intend to operate on the transportation on a COOD basis. Um, I'm I just like to pay my my fee every time I go. I don't want to do a credit account. They had mentioned in our meeting that they wanted me to do a a commercial credit account. Um, I don't like to use credit. I don't really use it for anything. Uh, so I'd like to just do a cash payment. I'm happy to do some sort of commercial tracking account so they can track what I'm bringing in the amount. I we had a little discussion before the meeting. So, I'm happy to do some sort of tracking account, but I'd like to just pay my bill when I go like everyone else. Um,

and then uh the only other thing is I would uh it's probably obvious, but I would just like the whatever determination be given to all parties in writing so it's uh official. Um, so I would agree that the formal grievance um is now moot provided that these interpretations um and clarifications um are codified in the record um and the written determination that's provided to everyone. Um so yeah, I think I think that was all the couple points of clarification. Um, otherwise I'm I'm glad that this is getting resolved and uh I'm also glad that there's going to be more of a process to the ban going forward so other people, you know, don't necessarily have to go through all this without um more clarity. Uh so yeah, I think that's about all I had to say. I think I'm ready for questions from you guys.

Questions from council. Kendra, thank you. Um, so Connor, you're happy with the talks that you had and you're you think the grievance is solved. Is that what you just said? Um, I'm happier than I was before. Yeah. Well, and also in in my talks with them, uh, they hadn't acknowledged the 2.89 exemption yet. She had mentioned that I didn't respond to an an email that I might have missed. Um, so when I saw that in the staff report, I was glad that they were acknowledging that 2.89 89 exemption. Um, so yes, if that 2.89 exemption is fully acknowledged, all parts of it, then yes, I am happy

and and you would drop the complaint. Yes, provided the 2.89 exemption in its entirety is acknowledged. But you haven't dropped it yet because of that. Uh, yeah. I just wanted the the formal clarification on the abating a nuisance portion of that. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, Joel? Um, Connor, I I need to catch up with you. You You were um you had I got three conditions. Is that correct? Um I think so. The three points that I Well, let me let me repeat back what I got and you tell me if I'm wrong, okay? Cuz I I'm probably wrong.

The first one is not only selling a property, but abating of nuisances under uh 2.89 2.8.9. The other is that you want to deal on a cash basis rather than uh a credit basis. Yes. And the third thing that you'd be allowed to um pick up um roadside garbage um on either public or or private land or you didn't specify, but I I was reading it as being public land. Yeah. generally when there's, you know, piles that people just illegally dump on the side of the road, usually it's back road on county roads or BLM roads or whatever. So, yeah. Right. Right. Okay. Okay.

And I would be paying anything else in addition to those conditions. Um I think that was really it. Um I'm happy to follow all the rules of the franchise agreement and the the districts. I know that there's, you know, Republic Service has their districts, Sunation has their districts. Um, I'm aware of all those specifics and everything. So, um, I believe those were my my last main points of clarification that I wanted. Okay. Thank you,

Eric. Hey, Connor. How you doing? Um, paragraph 2.8.9. Um, are you satisfied with that? If um, essentially, uh, I guess, let me rephrase the question. Um, how are you supposed to prove? Did you discuss with with the uh with the company how you're supposed to prove uh preparing that you're preparing a property for sale uh that you're abating uh nuisances? Um how are you supposed to be able to prove all these different things? So, did you discuss that?

I just I spoke with uh I think it's Julie uh just here at the beginning of the meeting. Uh she said that they were going to have a document that the property owner would sign saying, "Hey, we're preparing a property for sale." Um signing that's where this trash is coming from. Um maybe there could be a a similar document that's uh this is a a nuisance that's being abated, whether it's uh here's a picture of it on the side of the road or something like that. Um and I'm happy to work that out, but they said that they were going to draft something on the property for sale side. I could draft something up on the abating a nuisance side. Um, so yeah. Okay, good. Thank you. Andrew, did you have more? Yeah,

I did. Um, so the setting up a account, is that just for you? What's your understanding of that? That's going to be a process for everyone going forward across the board.

Uh, it sounds like it's only for me. I guess I'm special. Um, or maybe they're going to do it for anyone that is doing junk removal going forward. I think is maybe what it uh if they identify any other junk haulers, then maybe that's their process. And I think maybe they'll clarify when they get up and speak, but uh I think I think that's kind of what it is. If they identify someone as a a junk hauler, then they want to be sure to track at that point. I think and I could I you know, I don't want to speak for them, but that was the gist of it. Um cuz she said that they were probably okay with, you know, just doing C. She said they can't force me to do, you know, a credit account. Um so they she said that should be okay. Um they just wanted more of the tracking and I'm happy to, you know, do some sort of tracking account or whatever. So I I have one uh question actually. I I think uh your answer was uh covered already in your response to Eric, but just to be triply sure. So, you know, for me last time the the whole due the whole missing due process part was the real sticking point for me. And that seems to be worked out pretty well. And again, to make completely sure, uh before and after pictures, if you claim that you've picked up garbage at the side of the road, hopefully you're going to provide before and after pictures, and that would essentially be, I believe, part of the due process if there was ever an issue. So that would be your responsibility to provide that like when you go to the transfer station or whatever, right?

Yeah. Whether they ask for it or not, that's your responsibility to provide that. Yeah. Um and yeah, I can um Yeah, I can definitely provide that either way. I can print out pictures or I can have it digitally or I can email it. I can do all three. So yeah, definitely. So yeah, before and after. Yeah. What it looked like and what it looked like when you were done. Yeah. And then uh I I can even I believe you know when I take a picture on my phone there's a a geo tag a locator tag so it even great you know can even go that far with it. So great thank you. Yeah. Anything else from council? And do we have someone from republic? I think thank you Connor. Thanks someone for public Julie or someone else. Great.

Good evening. Um, again, it's Julie Jackson with Republic Services. So, I thought I would just real quickly update you on what has transpired since the meeting last month. So, we did meet with Connor just outside council chambers just after the meeting to talk about setting up a meeting. We did set up a meeting for February 10th. Um, we talked for about an hour on that meeting. We felt that it was pretty productive and felt like we were we had resolved the things. I will say the nuisance abatement part of 2.8 8.9 is news to us tonight and I um and I think the needle keeps moving, the target keeps moving a little bit and that makes it a little bit difficult for us, but I think we can resolve that. Um we did ask Connor to set up an account because it's a good way for us to track what's coming in and to have some documentation of that. The other thing that is important for um with an account is that um anybody who's doing recycling commercially, if it that's what he's actually doing, needs to report that to DEEQ as a part of a collector's survey at the end of the year. Um we're responsible for it and he is as well or maybe I don't know. We'd have to work out those details, but we can when we have an account that we can track, we can print out those reports and we can help provide that documentation as well. uh it does not have to be a credit account. We certainly can't force him to pay on credit and that's really not the intent of having an account. The intent of having an account is more for his tracking purposes and our tracking purposes. I think it keeps us all honest. I will say that this is to apply to anyone in the the same kind of business. any contractor who we wonder if they're haulering solid waste, if it's somebody who might in the future um we might be documenting to see if they need to be banned from the transfer station if they're not following and abiding by the franchise rules. So, this would be for anybody. All of these rules would be um not just for Mr.

Kirkpatrick, for sure. Um so, what we'd like to have is his contractor's license on file for work that comes in as a part of a contractor's job. We'd like to have the vehicles that are going to come in under that account and the names of employees who can place material on that account. I think we can we can document what's coming in um on a cash basis. So, we'll figure out how to do that for him. Um so, we also told uh sort of agreed that waste under the contracting part must be produced as a part of the contracting work. It can't be going in to clean out trash at someone's house. Not. and we're going to kind of hold to that not hauling municipal solid waste. Um that's what you need a franchise for. Um waste produced as a result of these property cleanups would be allowed. We will have a document drawn up as Mr. Kurpatre stated. That would be not just for him but for others as well. that would require them to it we would require not only the property owner to sign it but for that property to be located within our service area because again this doesn't apply to Southern Oregon sanitation. So we would have that documentation at the time and that would be great. Um after we met with him we felt like as I said I think we felt like we were all in agreement. after we met with him, we did meet with the city and um to talk about this due process pro process and we are in agreement with that as well. We think that makes a lot of sense. Um we while on 2.8.9 while we do believe that that section is really intended to be for materials as a um created as a part of a judicial process or a code enforcement issue. We concede that the language is vague enough that we will allow him to haul that cleanup

material from those properties that are being um prepared for sale. And here's the here's the the one hitch I'm going to say is because we had this this new thing thrown at us just as we got started tonight. Um, the roadside cleanup, I would say we'll give we would be willing to give that a shot and say if you have before and after pictures of the roadside cleanup, we're pretty good at knowing how much waste comes from whatever pictures where the waste is shown. We'll we'll make every effort to make that work. If it doesn't work, we'll go back to the solid waste agency. We'll we'll contact Mr. Kirkpatrick and say, "Hey, feels a little like some of this is solid waste coming from someplace else." So, um, we're definitely willing to work through that piece with him as well. So, that's pretty much I mean, at this point, we're just sort of waiting. We didn't bring the complaint, so there's no action for us to take. We're just waiting for your decision then. And unless you have any questions,

questions from council, Indra? Yes. in the information we received this time um and I just want to clarify it talked about um reusable and and so what's exempt what seemed more clear this time in the verbiage was that um pe people can can or or thrift stores can collect and transfer like just amongst the in the city but they can't actually bring it to the transfer station to

I think the intent of a nonprofit agency collecting reusable and repairable goods means that those are to be reused and repaired. So I don't know what material would need to be thrown away at the transfer station in that case. I think that one specifically deals with reusable and repable goods to be used at the thrift store. And we had that conversation as a part of the um meeting we had with Mr. Kirkpatrick and I think our our strong feeling is he runs a thrift store and I think he has that expertise to know what can be reused and repaired and what probably wouldn't. One part of that conversation was well I collect things that maybe the homeless folks would like to have and I can go give that to them

but if I can't then I need to throw it away. and we said, you know, we're really going to hold the line there and say that you that exemption applies to reusable and repable goods, not collecting material that homeless folks might like. And and I'll share with you what I shared with him. Um I've worked on several task force around the state in Salem specifically on um cleaning up some of these homeless encampments. And one of the really big problems statewide is that people are so well intended and they really want to share what they have with some of these folks who don't have anything. But a big part of the problem is clothing and household goods get dropped off in mass and some of these encampments and and we're talking about people who really don't have the means to transport that material or save that material or store that material. And so it just adds to the waste at these locations. And we don't think that's a good solution either. So, um, we suggested that maybe that be something he not do and that we would, you know, and in every other respect, we would expect him to know that this is not, this stained garment is not something that somebody's going to want and that he shouldn't take anything that's trash. Now, this thing, I think we talked at length about couches and that he couldn't get a cape, he might take a couch and then find he can't repair it. I think nine times out of 10 he knows which couch he can repair and clean. But if he doesn't, once in a while we said, "Yeah, we'll take a couch from you once in a while." But if we are getting these pickup loads of what we deem to be municipal solid waste, then we're going to come back and have some questions. But I, you know, as I said, I think we had a good conversation. Um, we've we've talked with the city. We feel like we have a good process in place. Um, we have an attorney online if you have legal questions for us that I can't answer. Mike Coward is online and can answer those. But I I think we are there. I mean, I think we'll continue to work through this with Mr. Kirkpatre and anyone else in that situation.

That's great that you all talked it out. Do you have anyone else in that situation? Um, there are a couple others who've been banned and we'll notify them that they can go through this process if they choose to. Yeah. Thank you. Sure. Victoria, so you um created the due process and this seems like it's a due process process. Really? We didn't I will say we didn't create it. That was written by Miss but with in conjunction with the city. Absolutely. Um and you feel satisfied with that that the the client would be um protected and that you would also be protected so going forward you would be able to

Yeah. It's really a much better position for us too as well and and I think that was something very positive that came up at the last meeting that really shone a light on on something that needed a solution. So we're glad to have that as well. That's great. Thank you. Sure, Joel. Well, I just want to thank both of you for working together. I think for the public good. Um, you know, in my past I was um managing federal land and with a lot of garbage on it and to get rid of that um we u we we had a con we the citizen advisory committee said we got to get rid of it. Well then how do you do that? Yeah.

And uh so it's for the public good and I appreciate both of you working together in good faith to do that. So thank you. Yep. Of course.

Okay. I I have a question. Um so it says um under the due process um it mentions I'll just read it. Uh in addition city staff has met with public services in southern Oregon sanitation and it talks about the franchises. I guess that means both public service and southern Oregon uh sanitation. So are you speaking on behalf of both? Uh, and why um uh what what what relevance does Southern Oregon Sanitation have in this particular complaint? Are they controlling any of the uh transfer stations that that we're referring to with this due process or is it Republic or is there someone from Southern Oregon Sanitation that wants to speak tonight? Can you explain how that all ties together?

Yeah, sure. So, as Mr. Kennedy said, we we are only speaking for Republic Services. Um this this 2.8.9 8.9 clause only exists in our franchise agreement. It doesn't exist in Southern Oregon's franchise agreement. So any waste coming from um issues in that clause would only be allowed from areas that come from within Republic Services collection area and they would have to go to the Merlin transfer station. Now, when you're talking about the ban on folks at transfer stations, that's the part where Southern Oregon also um Trent Carpenter was on that call and we talked about that. So, he's involved with that as well because there are folks banned from his transfer station as well and they would use the same due process. So, it would be um universal for the whole city. And certainly, I don't want to speak for him anymore if he wants to speak to that. So, I'll let him answer questions if you have more. Yeah, I I would like to hear from someone from Southern Oregon Sanitation to see if they're also buying into this.

Sure. Yeah, I I did. Yeah, Jason. Yeah. Yeah. Counselor, thank you. I just wanted to make a brief comment about that. So, what we did based on your comment, you you identified a hole in the franchise agreements and so we did want to draft that um because it affects them. We wanted to have something that was actionable, enforcable for both parties. Um, and then if we're good with this language, we then also have to introduce that to the county so that we can try to get that in in there. However, both of the transfer stations are only in the city franchise agreement. So that's why we involve both parties. Right. Thank you. Yeah. And if you don't have questions for me, I don't know if you want to hear anymore, but

we have any more questions for Julie? Yeah. So I I we we should hear some from somebody from Southern Oregon Sanitation. See if they're buying in here also. Thank you.

Yeah. Thanks for your time. We appreciate it. Council Trent Carpenter, Southern Oregon Sanitation. Um, yeah, we got involved in the due process part because I think it's important and it's important for all five of the franchises that are here in Josephine County. And while there's still some finetuning to be done, I think conceptually we have a really good foundation of what makes sense not only from us as a franchise holder to the city, to the county, to the city of Cape Junction and to the public to be able to have a process in which they can see how to proceed. Um the the the two things that I would touch upon and I certainly will take questions afterwards. One is we also have talked to Mr. Patrick and saying we are willing to lift the ban as long as he's abiding by the rules and regulations that are in our franchise which are very similar to Republic's. We do have some nuances in some of the language and specifically the cleaning up properties for sale is not in our franchise. So that piece would not work in our areas or any of the other franchise areas just in the city limits of Republic's area um under that specific exemption. The other one that you guys have been talking about is abating a nuisance. Um, I think there's some very specific language about abating the nuisance and I would recommend you ask maybe your legal counsel because that's not I don't know that abating a nuisance falls under the definition if something happens to be on the side of the road. But we also when I talked to Mr. Kapatrick talked about as as I was out there too like when we did a Kirby mainline cleanup and he was volunteering. This has never really been about you going and picking up garbage for free and not charging anybody, you would be allowed to bring that into the transfer stations. This is about charging somebody for that service. And that's a real simple but complex nuance. So, if you're going to go out and volunteer your time and go clean up a devil slide or you're going to go do this and you're charging nobody, you get to bring that to the transfer station. If you're going

to say to a property owner, I'm going to charge you $400 to take that to the transfer station. That's when you start getting into the are you violating the franchise or do you fit into one of these exemptions? Council have any questions for Mr. Carpenter?

So on that last subject when the Forest Service was willing to pay to have somebody clean up that roadside garbage and Connor step forward, would your company be willing to step forward and do that for pay? So, this is how I would say that. Um, the roadside services that I've seen cleaned up sometimes are coming from grants and they're going to a nonprofit that's, as an example, the Kirby Cleanup. Uh, Mother Line, which is a nonprofit, had some grants from the solid waste agency and also some grants from the government and then they put that together and then everybody volunteered to do it. If if the city or the county, not the city because you have some exemptions there. If if they if the F forest service said, "Hey, we're going to contract with somebody to go clean that up." They would need to use our boxes because then it becomes not volunteer, it's being paid for, and then you become you're hauling solid waste. And that's the the nuances of, hey, I'm going to show up and help and do the right thing. We're all about that. If you're going to show up and get paid now, you need to have a conversation because you very well could be violating a franchise. Victoria,

but you feel like this framework gives you um the ability to address this the the new um uh due process would give you the ability to address it.

Yeah, I believe so. I think the due process that we have a rough draft of would very much not only outline it for us, but outline it for you guys and outline it for the person that's doing it. There's some nuances, like I said, that probably need to be worked through because sometimes, as an example, somebody shows up to our transfer station and it says XYZ hauling on the site and we say, "Hey, what are you doing?" "Oh, I haul garbage." Well, you can't do that. Normally, we would let them in one time, but if they showed up a second time, we'd say, "Hey, you can't dump here. That's that's a violation of our franchise. You're getting paid to haul garbage." Yes, we might not know anything other than what's on the side of their truck and not be able to give them written notice. I mean, there's just little nuances, but fundamentally, I think we really like the idea. A number of these things we already had in place. Like, if we had somebody that was hauling and we've had two or three people sign an attestation that says, "I understand the rules now. I won't be doing that. I'm only cleaning up my property." They sign it, we get it. Good. Goodbye. Great. You can come in now. So, that is something I think is fundamental that there's ways in and ways out. And this document and this agreed upon procedures for the most part outlines that very well. Indra.

So Connor got paid by the city to do some cleanup a few years ago is my understanding. But so because he got paid by the city, he would not be able to dump. So, that's another exemption that's in the franchise that's not in front of you right now that allows the municipal body to contract with somebody because you wrote the document, we signed the document, you reserve the right, not you guys, but whoever did it reserve the right to have that ability. So, yes, the city could contract with somebody and say, "Hey, the homeless are out there. Um, we're going to they moved. We got a bunch of garbage. We're going to contract with somebody to come do that." That is well within the city's right to do that. And the document's not in front of me, but I think that's

2.8.8. Anything else from council? Thank you, Jen. Yeah. Anything else from council? Thank you. Okay. So, I think it goes back to uh Did we want to hear from the public? Public comment at this point. Okay. So, we have public comment on this for against or make a state your name, please. And

Ra Brown. I didn't hear anything about the actual fees that the dump uh you know that the uh transfer stations charge for people to dump any kind of you know whatever thing and uh they they charge pretty high fees in case of say mattresses you know couches big stuff and I think they're getting their money's worth. They shouldn't have to worry about whether the man is being paid to do it or not. It's, you know, people got to make a living and they're making a living off of what they're doing and they keep raising those rates. So, you know, I've got my little roadside shelf in front of my house that uh people come and bring stuff to that they want to get rid of. And uh hopefully it's something that somebody else wants. Now, this last week, I had a bunch of uh concrete block and uh weird concrete pieces that are supposed to be, I suppose, planters or something like that. And I'm going to have to get rid of some of that stuff after, you know, after if it sits out there long enough. I don't want it to be there. And I want to be have a place to put it. Now, I have a nice big big trash can because I've got a fairsized family and I have a lot of trash that gets dumped there. You know, people bring stuff in a paper bag and then they

just leave the bag, they leave the boxes, they leave these plastic totes or small plastic totes and I have to take care of those most of the time. Thanks. Okay. Any other public comment? Yeah. And Connor, you have uh I think it's three minutes to wrap it up or address this again.

Thank you. I just had a a few things that I noted down. Uh so for the recycling, the mattress recycling that I do is uh it's through the state. It's the mattress recycling council. Um, so that is all that is all through the DEQ and that all gets tracked. Um, and then uh so yes, I I like to give back to the homeless if it's go if it can be used one more time before it's considered trash. I think that's a good thing. Um, but that's I do acknowledge that some of that stuff that gets given back to the homeless ends up as litter. And that's why I want to that's why I really want to be able to clean up trash that is litter on public land. Um, so I think those I I recognize that those two things kind of go together. Um, as far as the thrift store, I'm fine with using the dumpster for my thrift store. I have one there. Um, you know, I'm fine with just Yeah, I'm fine with just using the dump for my thrift store aspect. I'm fine with just using the dumpster going forward. And so that's fine with me. Um, and uh, so yeah. And then, oh, I just uh I just emailed over Jason a uh uh nuisance abatement certification uh thing that just basically says I'm only doing work that fits in the 2.89 exemption and it would be, you know, if it's a private property nuisance or something like that. So, uh just wanted to say that too.

Okay. Um any questions from council? So, I had uh one more clarification I'd like to hear. So, I think you might have just touched on it, but something that is uh I've I've wondered about and I think Julie may have touched on it earlier. So, if you're uh clearing out a property or wherever you get all your stuff from that is recyclable, cleanable, reusable, etc. Um, okay, you're going to bring that to your thrift store, theoretically, sell it hopefully, or find find a good home for it. But my guess my question is if mixed in with that is some of that is really kind of more like trash than reusable. So theoretically you're not supposed to then uh put it this way that's a different category of of of goods. So um my question is how long do you keep something at your store before you then try to dispose of it? In other words, how do we know that um you know uh your actual intent is to uh resell or reuse, etc., etc. Uh how long would you have to keep something at your store before you then throw it away? Or are you saying that whatever you would throw from your store would automatically just go in your dumpster and they're that basically the franchisee gets there? Yes, they're due.

Yeah, essentially uh stuff from my store, I wouldn't really need to be transferring to the transfer station if uh as long as the 2.89 89 exemption is acknowledged, I guess, if that makes sense. Um, well, and then cuz they they also did acknowledge that I could occasionally bring a couch. So, they uh so yeah, they they were be they were willing to work with I guess on the bulk items on that. Uh I'm not sure if that answered I guess I guess to be more clear, I'm sorry, I should have been more clear. So, when something that you deem is recyclable or reusable, etc., actually because it's been in your store taking up floor space for so long turns into in your mind at that point trash. What do you do with it?

Um it just goes in the dumpster right now. Yeah. And that so that would be your plan moving forward. You go in the dumpster and then you have to pay like everybody else through your dumpster pickup. Yeah. And and they had they mentioned that if I reach out and say, "Hey, my thrift store has a couch." They'd be willing to accept a couch from the thrift store occasionally. Um so they they Yeah. They said they'd be workable with that. So, right. Thank you. Anything else from council? Thanks. Oh, Indra. No. Okay. I guess Thank you. We're We're finished. Yeah. So, comes back to uh council discussion. Oh, okay. Andrew, you have a question?

I have a question for Jason. Um, so the due due process, that's a a great thing across the board. We want it to be fair for everyone. But then I'm hearing that one agreement is different from the other. So that nuisance part is going to be only republic but not SOS and is that fair? And so I'm wondering is is are you looking at that to change that?

So one of the things that we've been talking about is um our franchise agreements are decades overdue for a pretty major overhaul. Um, our intent would be to work with Wall-E over at the county to do a major rewrite of all of the agreements. Um, to make sure that they are all current with current code and that they're all in agreement so that we don't have these little issues like there's an exemption in one agreement but not in four others because that makes it harder for everybody to manage. Um, so that would be our intent moving forward. Hi, Victoria.

Um, yeah, I just wanted to see if I could hear from uh Republic again really quickly if everything sounds good to you now that everything has been um discussed.

Um, one thing I'd like to clarify is that the exemptions for reusable and repable material is completely separate from the other exemption for um preparing property for sale. So those two don't cross. It's not and we put this all together and we can do everything within each exemption. So those two are completely separate and we would expect those to stay separate. Um the other thing I would say is that I think we we have a little bit of work to talk with perhaps the city and the county and Mr. Kirk Patrick as a representative of people in his industry to figure out this nuisance abatement piece because I think that is very vague and um a pickup load of municipal solid waste coming in. We would certainly need to know more about that when that comes in because otherwise we don't have any any due process. We don't have a way to justify that. So um I feel like we've we've worked through the hard things and this is just one more thing. So yeah, I feel really good about it and I think we can certainly work through that one. But I will say that we'll we'll definitely meet again to get that one worked through.

But the nuisance abatement, it seemed like you thought that was something that came up newly tonight. But it did with uh terms, which is something you might have to work through. But it sure in terms of of everything that we've been dealing with last time and this time, everything. Yep. I would agree with that. Yeah, I think we're good. All right. Okay. Thank you. Thanks for your time. Thank you. I guess at this point we turn it back to council for discussion. Victoria. Well, it seems like both parties are uh very satisfied and so I would like to move to determine that the complaint is moot. Great. Andrew with a second. Is that right? Great.

Any more discussion? Oh, Joel. I just I just had a question. um that assumes that it's um going to be in writing and who who does that and do we need to get into those details or is that just administrative tasks that will be taken care of? I can take that a little bit. Um there are in your staff report um some I think it's on page four there's three numbered one two and three. we could essentially just copy and paste that um as your definitions or as what was determined um that they agreed to.

And then did you see anything in what Connor had like um he he doesn't object against an account? I don't want to put words into but he wants it to be cash. uh those type of things, the roadside garbage, uh the abating of the nuisance, if there's a disagreement there, then somehow come up. I rep Republic said there was some ambiguity and in how that was interpreted. Um but um I don't know how we can leave that to you putting together that document.

I can answer that actually. Um there is a statement already in your staff report. Um, nuisance abatement is actually a legal process and a legal term governed by state statute and it specifically includes cleaning up properties determined unfit for use due to toxic contamination from illegal drug manufacturing. So, picking up stuff on the side of the road would not fall within that definition.

That being said, as we've heard tonight, the um pick uh the purpose of this is for the people getting money to clean up a property and take it to the transfer station. If it's on the side of the road, it's discarded. it doesn't belong to anybody. There's nobody else that's responsible for that. So, I don't think it would fall within that, but it wouldn't necessarily be disallowed either. And it sounds like they're willing to take things from the side of the road. So, I'm not seeing any legal issues within that. So, the the legal ease is one method. What I both heard him say they were willing to do, I don't think the legal ease will prevent that. I don't either. Okay. Uh, Indra,

just to follow up with that, nuisance, are you saying is only for drug uh places like not if your neighbor has a giant pile of garbage?

Correct. Nuisance abatement is a specific governed by statute. It's OS 105.550 to 105.600 that addresses specific nuisance abatement. I think we talked about this at the last meeting that nuisance abatement and the hazardous conditions are terms of art in the legal world and usually they only apply in those proceedings the judicial proceedings for where property cleanups are required. That's why those particular terms are in that exemption because they related to to the intent of that exemption. It's that cleaning up property for sale piece that was vague enough to fall outside of it and there's no specific legal definition for the property preparing property for sale part, but usually that's a part of the judicial order as well. So that's it makes sense that it's in there, but it's not limited to legal terms like the rest of that exemption would be. So, can you address if a property is a nuisance but not legally cuz there's junk and rats all over say um what's the process the city has and then does the city if they don't clean it up then does the city pay someone to go clean it up? it would go through the code enforcement and other processes um and hopefully never get to the point where we had to go through formal abatement processes. But um yes, there's a process to address those particular nuisances and it's under legal standards.

Any further from Joel?

I just had one quick one. Uh it's for Stephanie. So um we need to do this in writing. um you know just like u the proper procedures for anybody that's not following the order in terms of what needs to be done under the franchise agreement. I would guess that there'd need to be appropriate documentation that um the the uh person who made the complaint here would have to officially withdraw the complaint in writing and and the conditions of the of the uh resolution between the two parties would be documented and and that we as the city are going to do that then. So I I think if you find the complaint to be moot because they've both agreed that the complaint has essentially been negated by the fact that Republic is going to let him back in as long as he qualif as long as he follows the rules of those exemptions. I think that you're you could find the complaint moot because and then the three provisions that are outlined in the staff report and then we can just and direct staff to prevent

and you wouldn't have to withdraw the complaint. Wouldn't have to withdraw it. just find it moot because those three components have been agreed to by the parties. Uh Indra,

I just want to say that we value um the services you all provide the waste management and we value our small businesses that help our residents and ultimately we want all our businesses to thrive and we want um our citizens to be benefited to the best that we can do. So, thank you. Yeah, I guess uh I'd also just like to thank uh Connor for having so much persistence and bringing this to us because we actually got to see the lack of due process in this contract. It was actually a pretty big pretty big hole. So, because of that, we're the city's going to be better off with you bringing this forward. So, I I really appreciate that and your persistence know it must have been at times aggravating. Yeah. Thank you. Um so, I guess uh we're going to we'll vote now. So, uh Victoria, you made the motion. How do you vote? Yes,

Joel. Yes, Eric. Yes, I vote. Yes, Kathleen. Yes, Indra. Yes. Okay. And Rick, are you still there? Yes.

Great. It's unanimous. It's uh 7 to zero. On to this thing. All right. Okay. At this time, we're um opening a public hearing to consider an application for um property located on Highland Loop um to uh let's see to annex that uh into the city limits. And I guess uh we've got a staff report coming.

Um Oh, yeah. I'm sorry. Yeah, I'm sorry. Sorry. Thank you. And um and let's see. We'll begin we'll begin the hearing with staff report followed by presentation by the applicant, statements by persons in favor of the application, statements by by persons in oppos opposition of the application and an opportunity for additional comments by the applicant and staff. After that has occurred, the public comment portion will be closed and the matter will be discussed and acted upon by the council. Uh is there anyone present who wishes to challenge the authority of the council to hear this matter? Okay. Uh, none that I see. Uh, is any do any counselors wish to abstain from participating in this hearing or declare a potential conflict of interest? Uh, nothing. Um, let's see. Are there any counselors who wish to disclose discussions, contacts, or other exparte information they have received prior to this meeting regarding the application? And we're good there. And in this hearing, the decision of the council will be based on specific criteria which are set forth in development code. All testimony which apply in this case are noted in the staff report. If you'd like a copy of the report, please write that on a note to the city manager and one will be provided. Um, at this point it's important to remember if you fail to raise an issue with enough detail to afford the council and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue, you will not be able to appeal to land use board of appeals based on that issue. And at this point, we're going to proceed with the staff report. Thank you, Council President, members of the council, and members of the public. Um, we're going to review this from a staff report standpoint. Um, and then, uh, open up. We do have the applicant, uh, Mr. Woodruff here tonight. Um uh we have an annexation request before you and I'll just got a few slides to kind of orient you first. Um so we're talking about the property

um up in the very northwest corner of town uh Highland Estates. It's 30 lot subdivision that's been under construction for quite a while actually. Um where the timing on this is a little bit different than often what you see. Um often you see property that is annexing first and then will be developed. In this case, uh the the the subdivision has largely been built out with the infrastructure and is ready to go. Um so it's about 7.3 acres and relates to the council goals of economic growth and housing fiscal stability by annexing property in the urban growth boundary for housing. So, as I mentioned, uh we're going to take you into the very northwest part of part of the uh city limits. Um this is Highland. This the main collector that uh accesses up to Vine. So, we're on the west side of that. Um the Dollar Mountain and the city's uh water reservoir are right next door. Um this is the urban growth boundary that it butts up against. So, it's it's it literally touches the urban growth boundary. Um, it also touches the existing city limits. This shows you a little bit better. Here's an aerial showing you the area. Um, a little bit older subdivisions. There's two of them, the Woodbrook Estates and a couple of others that are here on the north side of the project. Um, and then some unincorporated areas that's south and uh west and east. So, this just shows you the relationship to the urban growth boundary and the city limits. Um, I don't know if you probably can't see it too well, the yellow line is the city limits. Um, and you can see that it's that this property that we're talking about does touch the city limits on the north and then the urban growth boundary is here on the west. Um, this is the final plat that was

submitted last month to the city. Um, Lassen Way comes in from the north and is going to be extended through, I shouldn't say will be, it already is. If you've been up there, um, to Dollar Mountain, you can see that it's largely there. Uh, Northwest Stark Way is another new city street. Um, and then Lawson Way comes down here. I One important thing to point out on this particular application, um, here's the annexation map that was submitted. Um uh and this is what will be submitted to the state for their um approval as well. You can see down here. So Higgeland Loop is today a county road. It's countymaintained under county jurisdiction. Um the annexation that we're talking about tonight will annex uh half of that. So it's a 60-foot ride ofway um that is there today and the the proposal is to go to the center line. So we would annex 30 ft of that. And then uh this property also takes in land that's on the south side of Highland. Um the majority of the subdivision is here on the north side of Highland, but they there are I think it's maybe like five lots um that are on the south side. So both of those had to be taken in. In order to to do that, we did take in a portion of Hygeland. But in terms of maintenance responsibilities for Hygeland until um the rest of of Highland Loop is brought in uh that would continue to remain under county jurisdiction. Um not the case with Lassen and the other streets that are that have been created as a part of this subdivision. So I just I just wanted to make that point. Just a little more background. Uh the property is low density residential on the comp plan. It's zoned R18. Um the Urban Area Planning Commission in September of 2022 approved the tenative plan for the 30 lot subdivision. Um and

that's where there was a condition of approval to annex before the final plat could be approved. Um under organ revised statutes, uh the city can annex property as long as you have 100% of the property owners um or a triple majority. Um that's where all the rules are related to voting. So in this case because you have just a single property owner. There is no vote. Um it's up to the city council. Um we do have the consent from Mr. Woodruff as Highland Estates LLC who has given that uh written consent and signed the annexation uh proposal or application. I think I covered this first bullet. Um it's been approved by the planning commission. Um the second one there, the annexation is a condition of approval and then the the city surveyor has gone through and done the legal verification that the property does in fact touch the uh existing city limits. These are the six criteria that are in our code um before you can annex property that have to be found to be um affirmative. Um it has to be in the U urban growth boundary developed or developed consistent with city standards consistent with the comprehensive plan uh consistent with the development code organ revised statutes and then the last one uh has to have sufficient capacity to serve property that is being annexed. Um we in this case uh have already gone through that process because the final plat is where the storm water, the sewer, the water have all been reviewed and signed off by public works. Um so we do know we have capacity there as well as police and fire also reviewed the annexation and the subdivision a couple of years ago as I mentioned. Uh so if you approve this tonight um uh well I should say the staff reviewed those criteria and and

did find that they have been met. Um so if it's approved then we'll proceed with the uh process to run the legal description through the approval process and do all that fun stuff. Um it does take about 60 days um after your approval to to get through before it's formally in the city limits. Uh call to action is at your discretion. There's some uh motion options there. Um there is a recommendation before you to uh to annex a property into the city limits. So happy to take any questions. Any questions from council? Seeing none, we turn it over to the public. Is that right? Any anyone in the public that or do we turn to the applicant? I'm sorry. Was the is the applicant here? would you like to speak on your behalf or

Good. Thank you. Okay. If there's anyone else from the public that would like to speak for or against this and seeing none, I'll turn it back to council. Seth. Yeah. I move to adopt the ordinance annexing parcel 36-05-06-CA tax slot 813 into the grants pass city limits and have it read by title only first reading. Good. Got a second from Eric. And any discussion, councel? Okay, Seth, you made the motion. How do you vote? Yes. Victoria, yes. Joel, yes. Eric, yes. Yes. Kathleen, yes. And Indra, yes.

Motion passes. Oh, and Rick online. I'm sorry. Over the airways. Rick, was that a yes? Thank you very much. I'm sorry. Oh, okay. So, um, we had a unanimous that's the first first reading, right? Yes. An ordinance of the council of the city of Grants Pass annexing property located on Highland Loop, map 36506 CA, tax lot 813 into the city limits. Okay. Okay. So, we need a uh motion for a second reading. Eric,

I move to adopt the ordinance annexing parcel 36-05-06-CA tax lot 813 into the Grants Pass city limits and have it read by title only. Second reading and a second from Victoria. Any discussion? Okay, Eric, how do you vote? Yes. I vote yes. Kathleen, yes. Andrea, yes. Seth, yes. Victoria, yes. And Joel, yes. Okay. Unanimous second reading. Oh, I'm Jeez, Rick, I'm sorry again. Thank you, Rick. It is unanimous.

An ordinance of the council of the city of Grants Pass, annexing property located on Highland Loop, map 365 uh 06 CA, tax slot 813 into the city limits. Okay, on to the next. We've got uh an ordinance adding grants pass municipal code to uh let's see the motorized vehicle use on Dollar Mountain. And I guess we've got uh we're going to hear from Stephanie on this.

We're good. Yeah. CL That's your middle. Well, that's silly.

All right. Good evening. Um, we're here today to talk about the Dollar Mountain Trails Ordinance. Um, I know that you have probably seen the emails that came in to Mayor Council regarding some of the concerns about what's been happening up on Dollar Mountain. Um this is an ordinance amendment that staff has been working on um for a couple of months now to make sure that we were addressing the concerns as well as the needs for the city. Um so what you'll see before you today is an ordinance to prohibit the use of motorized vehicles on the newly developed trails on Dollar Mountain. The relationship to council's goals is that it supports the goals of public safety by amending the city's laws to address emerging issues and increase accountability as well as infrastructure by protecting the recreational amenities that the city has invested in. Um, just as some background, the city did invest a million dollars to purchase Dollar Mountain properties and at that time the land was posted as prohibiting motorized vehicles. The city then invested more than $600,000 to develop the mountain biking and pedestrian recreational trails. And at the time that the plan for those trails was developed, it was deemed impractical for use um by motorized vehicles. And this wasn't done just by the consultant, but by the regional motorized trail association's input. They said that it would also be impractical. During trail development, uh we did experience motorized vehicles continuing to use those trails. Uh and the use and the damage caused by those motorized vehicles resulted in project delays as well as additional costs to repair those damages. I think the number that I heard was more than $10,000 to repair damages during development alone. Since project completion, motorized vehicles have not ceased their use. Um it's still posted as no motorized vehicles and has been throughout. Um, PSAs have been issued by the city and motorized vehicle riders have been engaged with by the contractors during the development, by staff, by neighbors. They're aware of the rule and some of

them have indicated that they will not comply. Um, motorized vehicle use on the trails is problematic for the city. Um, there's the safety concern of uphill travel by the motorized vehicles on downhill only bike trails is a safety issue for the motorized vehicle versus bicycle. Um the collisions could be catastrophic. Um the four or six inch deep ruts that are being caused by the motorized vehicles that if a bicycle hits can cause injuries there. There's also the fact that it's damaging the trails and the ruts require repair and therefore cost to the city. The ruts are and other damage have changed water flow patterns and those can lead to erosion events which will cause further damage that would need to be repaired. There's the risk that the heat from the motorized vehicles can ignite dry vegetation during fire season and increase our wildfire risk. As well as the motorized vehicles on trails posted for uh no motorized vehicles discourages the intended users, the mountain bikers, the pedestrians um because they think that it's a risk for them to use it. So that kind of defeats the purpose of the development of that area. So, the new ordinance that was developed um would define what Dollar Mountain is, and it's those tax lots under the ownership of the city of Grants Pass, west of Northwest Crescent Drive, north of the Southern Pacific Railroad, and south of Interstate 5. And it would prohibit the operation of self-propelled motorized vehicles within the boundaries of Dollar Mountain. And there would be exceptions for emergency vehicles, vehicles used to conduct routine maintenance of the telecommunications tower or the trail system, and any other vehicle that's expressly authorized by the city manager. It does not include class E or class one ebikes. It provides that a violation of that section would be punishable by the maximum fine allowed under our code. And it would also provide notice that the

court may order a defendant who violates that section to pay restitution for any damage caused by the motor vehicle use. And then we also are proposing an amendment to so that the 5.57.220 would be new language. That would be a brand new ordinance. We would also be proposing an amendment to 1.36.010 010 paragraph J to include um as an exception to um for base fines that the 5.57220 could be the maximum fine otherwise it would be the uh $295 fine instead of $720 which is the maximum fine. So we'd like to allow for the maximum fine as well as restitution in this your call to action. Um there is no cost implication and your call to action is today but we can defer that if you wish. Alternatives include approving the proposed ordinance, approving the proposed ordinance with revisions, not approving the proposed ordinance, or continuing discussion to a future meeting. And I have a potential motion should you choose to move forward.

Okay, any questions? Uh, Eric, I think you mentioned it on one of the beginning slides. Um, as far as signage goes, basically, uh, are these signs big enough for everybody to realize for pe for for people that are out of from out of town and don't realize this? I mean, are are there numerous signs? Is it overwhelming? Uh, is it is it hard to miss um for for motor motorcycles?

I'll defer to community development to talk about the signage itself. Um, I can tell you that known violators, like there's a known group of individuals that routinely use the trails, they are aware of the regulation and we've seen social media posts that they don't intend to comply.

Uh, in terms of the signage, they I would say that there are standard um signage that you see in other parts of the park system. So, if I understand your coun your your your point counselor, they are not larger than that. you would certainly need to stop and you know to to read the as far as the font size. Um but they are they are labeled and identified um at at several spots because as you know you can you can access the mountain by hike loop crescent as well as coming from now if you if you come from uh the dollar mount I mean I'm sorry the devil slide area there is not any signage on that side because you know the city doesn't control that area.

I gotcha. Thank you. Um I think I don't know it might be looking worth looking into to see if maybe we need to make the signage bigger. I don't know the cost ramifications for that, but maybe uh full perimeter. I don't know. I don't even know if it would work. I'm just throwing a suggestion out there. Victoria, so uh the only thing that I was worried about, but you mentioned it that it does not this does not include ebikes. So, uh, class one or class I, I'm not sure if it's one or I one class one ebikes are exempted.

Oh, okay. And I know that there's it's just been a tradition for those mountain bikes to be up there forever, but uh, now with the new trail and the cost that has been um, with the money that's been spent, I think it's a really good idea to make sure there are no more motorized vehicles there. But I also understand the sadness of people who have been doing this for as long as I have lived here a long long time. So I um so I hope that they will understand the need for for it and uh my

is this a question? Thank you. would be uh is there going to be any um outreach to those groups of people or has there already been um it's just it sounds like they know basically but I just wondered if there's some formal outreach chief did you want to try to answer that or

uh from the park side I can say that there there have been some conversations s um uh both from city staff um as well as the contractor that worked up there for many months building the mountain bike trails. Um so uh granted it is it can be difficult um if someone is on a motorcycle they're they're they're moving very quickly. Um so there you know it it is I would say a more rare opportunity where they've stopped and you actually have the opportunity to engage in a conversation. Um, in terms of writing, there has been also communication with a a local motori motorcycle group um who uh who has placed on their Facebook page and some other things the the rules. Um, so there has been some level of communication that's happened.

Okay. And I'm just curious I'm just curious then is there any place in the city limits and I I don't think that there is other than this place uh where mountain bikes are able to ride or ju just would it be out in the county? Uh council are you you mean motorcycles or Oh that's what I meant motorcycles is there another place for them to be? Yeah I'm I'm I'm I don't think we have a designated area. I did I didn't think that we had but there are plenty of places in the county pro. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Uh Rick, uh you have a question?

Yes, I do. For the first violation, is there an opportunity to give a warning rather than a substantial fine? I'll leave that to you.

Hey, counselor. Uh Chief Hensman here. Um, that would be to the discretion of the officer to issue a warning. And to answer your question, um, it they we can absolutely. I I think we're at a stage where there won't be any warnings, we're going to have to uh probably go straight to enforcement. I think a lot of these people up there are just kind of doing everything they can to avoid contact with a police officer. So, if we do come in contact with them because it's going to be very difficult for a police officer, a CSO or a cadet to even uh do some enforcement up there. Um my my uh recommendation would be immediate enforcement and not um a warning. Thank you.

Indra. Oh, I'm sorry, Kathleen. It seems to me that uh if there's a new ordinance put in place that the signs would have to be changed and there would be something signifying this is the penalty that's going to happen. I mean that I'm not sure about signage.

I can speak to that. Um, you know, Brad and myself and and the team, city manager, we we've discussed these options and we'll work through that. Um, there's some other choke points. I think it's B Street and I think that's what Brad and I were kind of just nodding to one another where my guys have come in contact with them on weekends and it's causing like parking issues in front of neighborhoods and some folks are going to be in compliance and others will not. And I I think we'll get um significant compliance from some folks. And uh for those folks that are sneaking in through different directions, we'll we'll find time to try to enforce the rules and maybe surprise them every now and again. Uh Joel.

Um yeah, just really quick, Victoria, there's several there's there's a worldass um OV system that has about 200 miles, goes right to the edge of Crater Lake and uh has u it's just an excellent system up at Prospect. It's a little ways away. Uh Cave Junction has has several that are really world class also. Anyway, um we're focused on Dollar Mountain. There's other areas that uh have bikes, bikes only where you don't want motorized vehicles. Um a good example is the asphalt u pedestrian bikeways in river in um all sports park or the be B street jumps. Uh we we certainly uh uh and I don't know if we got regulations that cover these other areas or should we have one ordinance that that addresses it citywide.

As far as I know, we haven't heard complaints about those areas and damage or safety risks. But I think if that became an issue, we would make sure that the ordinances covered that as well. and and we do have uh B Street jumps in particular a sign that that is specific to motorized being prohibited. So any associated No, there is a separate section of the ordinance that that that we can use for that. It gives the city manager the authority on setting some of those. Yeah. I just I didn't want to see it.

Okay. Um so I have a a question. So, um, you know, I I don't necessarily want to be a fly in the ointment here. It seems like we're trying to solve a problem, but I I can tell you that, uh, last March, that's a year ago now. Um, the bikeways and walkways committee asked for a member of the police department to come to the meeting and discussed all of these things. So, all of these things were active a year ago and they've been active for a year. Um, how does how does chief how does how does us passing this ordinance tonight change anything at all? It's been it's been at least a year on police radar.

I I think I would kind of phrase that a different way. Of course, we have a lot on our radar in the city. There's a lot going on. Um I think what we've um determined while trying to even get people to stop because we're not going to jump out in front of a moving motorcycle to get their identification. Um we recognize that we don't have sufficient ordinances in place and this uh is going to fix that. This is going to provide a sufficient ordinance and give us the legal authority to enforce the rules um of motor motorized vehicle on Dollar Mountain.

So did you did the police department or city not have any uh legal way to to uh stop this problem in the last year? I think as we uh looked into this problem, we we examined the code and there was difference of differing opinions of the code section. Um and this is a way to um all feel good about the code section and what it says in black and white and really defines the problem and gives us an avenue for enforcement. So, with that said, what's the likelihood that this will be enforced this year? We'll do our best with everything we do around here, counselor.

Uh, let's see. We did we go to the public yet? No. Okay. So, anyone from the public would like to speak on this? Is the city allowed to use cameras up and down these trails and so be able to maybe identify people who are breaking the ordinance that you know cameras come out can come mighty small these days and hard to And once they fig figure out that they're going to have their picture taken, the picture of their bike, their motorcycle, they're going to quit once they get, you know, the cops coming after them. Thank you.

Okay. State your name. State your name and if you live in the city. Thank you. Valerie Blackwood said my name. What else did you want me to say? Are you a city resident? Grass. Oh, I am a city. I'm a resident of Grass. I just had a question. Since they've been doing this for years, don't they have a an easement? Don't they belong? Don't they own that? when you when you have an easement on property and you're like going back and forth and doing something for such a long time, maybe they need to sell that. Maybe you need to ask them to like purchase that easement from them. Just just a thought. Just wondering. I don't know for sure.

Thank you. Someone else. Yeah.

Stole my state your name and uh if you live in the city. Uh Steve Kroninger, I live on Woodson Drive, so I can see Dollar Mountain every every day. Um and uh so I have a couple questions. I love the idea of the of filming, and I really think the citizens who get involved in that, especially neighbors, cuz I don't want my house to get burned down because somebody's out there with a motorcycle. I'm sorry. They don't get to have that anymore. It's city property. You guys are all responsible for it. Something if a motorcycle does call cause a fire. Uh there's going to be I don't That's why you need this ordinance, you're going to have to pass it because um otherwise you guys are in trouble, you know, because uh you need to have and and to try and enforce it is great. But I think that I think the people who live in the neighborhood, the hikers, the people that use that, even bicycle riders could have their cameras ready and film them going by and then turn it over to the proper authorities. Obviously, we're not going to stand in there, but I also I I felt that if that's the maximum amount, that's okay. But if I went up to Dollar Mountain with a chainsaw, started starting taking down trees, what what I'm sorry, I'm out of time, but the idea is, wouldn't you take the saw away from me? So, isn't there a way of impounding the vehicle if you ever caught these people? Yes, you find them and that's not a warning. You just find them and if they do it again, bye-bye motorcycle. Just an idea.

And anyone else? Seeing no one else, I'm going to turn it back to council for discussion. Um, so the other thing, uh, and I'm sure the chief's thought of this, um, there's fire regulations and and with fire precautions and motorized and it involves motorized vehicles and violating those also carry a penalty. Um, I don't know if it's under municipal municipal uh authority or if it's a state authority and if we have the uh possibility to cite that. But if it's during high fire danger, you got a motorized vehicle on a non-motorized path, it's violation of uh state law.

Just a question for the staff. U is that a possibility to include that the confiscation of the motorcycle if they're found to be riding illegally? I'm going to give that one to the city attorney. My my guess is no because it's a violation. It's not a criminal matter, but you know, we're we're pretty resilient or not resilient, it's the wrong word. Um we're pretty um uh savvy to the Oregon Revised Statute. So, you know, for example, if we were to catch a guy, a gal on a motorized vehicle on a motorcycle, which is extremely hard to do. Um, and let's say, for example, we were able to pro, we were able to establish probable cause, more likely than not that they did that damage right in front of me to our property and I could assign a dollar value to that, I could arrest them. Uh, so there are options that we have. And then just to kind of speak to um camera systems, for example, um I I I think I'm speaking correctly when I say we may have tried this already with trail cams and they just get run over. Um but also too, it's really hard to identify a motorcycle that doesn't have to have a license plate on it and everybody looks the same with whether it's a yellow, green, or red helmet. Um so it's not that easy, but it's important to have that information. So, if we do have a um investigative lead, we could track that down. Um but um it's going to be tricky and like I said with councelor Pel, we're going to do our best. And then on the topic of forfeite, I'd have to look into it pretty heavily, but generally you're not going to be able to forfeit property unless there's actually a crime like chief mentioned and a violation wouldn't rise to that level. But that is why we included the reference to restitution and being able to go after that. That's actually going

to be a more complicated process than it sounds like because without a municipal court with the DA's office actually has to do any restitution things in a city violation which is a very odd construct. So we had to jump through some hoops to figure that part out. But we did add extra teeth beyond a fine um to also include that restitution for damages. Um, so there's a little more than just a fine.

So, uh, Stephanie, when we talk about whether or not it's a crime, to me, uh, you know, I think a really good case could be made, especially in the fire season in the middle of the summer, if somebody's literally, uh, you know, potentially causing a problem that could burn our city down. I mean, at what point do we and and you say that, you know, in order to confiscate, uh, we would have to elevate this to a crime. Um, you know, at at to me, I mean, that's something that I would actually support, you know, especially in those dry months because that's just completely irresponsible and it could affect 40,000 people.

And we might be talking about something completely different when we get to those levels there. There are additional crimes beyond what we're talking about. We're simply talking about riding a motorized vehicle by itself is a is a violation. So that's what this ordinance would prohibit. It could also there could be additional crimes committed on top of that that might trigger different penalties, different levels and things like that where they could also be charged under those statutes as well.

Well, I understand typically if something if if let's say someone were to start a fire and the city burned down, yeah, they could be charged. But is there a way to to uh have laws on the books that would be able to potentially confiscate uh a motorcycle even if it hasn't started a fire yet? But the guy's riding it in July or August when it's bone dry. Um that's a really irresponsible thing to do. But we've got really um uh we're not really doing quite frankly I don't think that much more than what we already have in the books with this. I mean is there a way to go there? I would have to look into it. My my gut says unlikely, but I'm willing to look into that and get you a complete answer.

Yeah. Thank you. Um Joel,

well, it would be an extremely stupid thing for a person to do because if they willfully uh disobey a fire regulation, it starts a fire. They're legally responsible for the full suppression costs, which in this case could be millions of dollars and damages just like Pacific Power was um uh people are trying to hold them responsible for the fires that were started on the electric fire lines. I mean, if and that was a lot less clear than this would be. I mean, this is a clear violation of fire regulations. So, um it would be a very stupid thing for not that somebody wouldn't do it, but it it'd be very stupid to do that because the penalty is uh would ruin your life.

Okay. So, at this point, uh going to entertain a a way to move the Kathleen. Yeah. I'll just make the motion and move to adopt the ordinance grant adding grants pass municipal code section 5.57.220 220 motorized vehicle use on dollar mountain violation amending section 1.36.010 point J violation penalty and declaring an emergency and have it read by title first reading. Okay. Second from Seth. Any discussion? Okay. Kathleen, how do you vote? Yes. Indra? Yes. Seth? Yes. Victoria? Yes. Joel? Yes, Eric.

Yes. I vote yes. And Rick, how do you vote? Yes. Thank you. It's unanimous. And ordinance of the council of the city of Grants Pass adding, excuse me, uh Grants Pass, Municipal Code, section 5.57.220, motorized vehicle use on Dollar Mountain violation, amending section 1.36.010J, violation penalty, and declaring an emergency. Okay. We have a a motion for second. Second reading. So moved. Indra. Okay. Any any discussion? Okay, Indra. How do you vote? Oh, I'm sorry. Second from Kathleen. Thank you. Yes. Uh Seth,

yes. Victoria, yes. Joel, yes. Eric, yes. Yes. And Kathleen, yes. And Rick, yes. Great. Thank you. Unanimous. An ordinance of the council of the city of Grants Pass adding Grantspass Municipal Code section 5.57.22 motorized vehicle use on dollar mountain violation amending section 1.36.010J violation penalty and declaring an emergency.

Okay, let's see. Okay, we've got uh council action resolution approving a fee waiver at Riverize Park for the 2026 community Easter egg hunt event. And we're going to hear from Brad. All right. Thank you, Council President, uh members of the council, members of the public. So, we're here to discuss a uh request for a fee waiver. This is related to the community Easter egg he hunt. This is being put forward by ParkW Watch um which is a nonprofit organization and they are um requesting a waiver to the fees uh specifically for some reservations of the park. Um I'll go through those in just a second. Um, according to their application, this is the first community Easter egg hunt that Park Wash will have hosted. It was hosted previously by some local realtors. Um, it is free and there will be no food or retail vendors. Um, it is planned for April 4th. So, as you know, you've seen a couple of these in the past. We do have a fee schedule um to recover various costs that are incurred by the parks division. Um that's the reason we have these. It's a completely general fund uh backed revenue source. And so this is one source that's why we have them. The fees that we're talking about tonight are listed there on the screen behind me. Um there is the Trailion Pavilion shelter fee. There's a large group application fee, a banner fee, and then the refundable damage deposit for a total of $277.50. Um, they are requesting that the full amount be waved. Um, denying the fee

waver request will not cancel the event according to uh Parkatch. Um, few other details. Uh, it, as I mentioned, it's free. they are estimating about 500 attendees um for a familyfriendly event. So in terms of cost implications, uh I noted already there is a uh $277 fee that we um charge for other types of uses. As a uh charitable organization, um they are requesting that that be waved, which as you know the council has done in for different events in the past for our park system. call to action is listed as tonight. Um you can approve the request to wave all or part of the park reservation fees. Uh you could deny the request. Um and there is a um motion on the screen there. Happy to take any questions. And I think we is is representative here from Parkwatch, right? I think we have Jenny. Okay. Yeah.

Any questions from council? Indra. So total requested fees on exhibit A is 27750 but on this page it says 22750 which which is it I'm sorry can you refer to the page number on the on page 47 the orange sheet it says um wave permit fees of 22750 but then on park watch's page exhibit A it says is 27750.

So I believe that that is the difference of the fees versus the deposit um or the banner fee maybe $50. Is it a 50?

So is there a reason you're suggesting this 227 and not waving the banner fee? Is there a reason for that? Um there's not um I I see where you're referring to now, counselor. Yeah, the current park reservation fee 227. Um so it could be that that came after the fact we um when this was put in, but I apologize. cuz I don't I don't know the difference for the discrepancy, but I think I do know that the the numbers that are here on this particular slide uh show the total amount that the parks department would charge normally. So I it could be that that banner came up after the fact and that's the $50 discrepancy. Um, Kathleen,

um, just to clarify, if by waving this fee, there would be, uh, the money would go toward eggs and, uh, candy and event purchases. So, that would help you all out. Joel, did I see your hand? Yeah. Joel, no. Victoria, ready to make a motion? So I Yeah, I would So I would just like to move to approve the resolution to grant a waiver of the park reservation fee. Yeah, we we're actually in question mode and then we're going to go to the public. Um Indra,

uh yes, that where's where's the banner hung and why?

Yeah, it might be more appropriate for the applicant to answer that, I think, who's been talking with our park staff. We have a couple of locations that we that we allow for them. Usually you see them right on 7th before you go across uh the bridge um at the main entrance kind of above the historic sign there kind of almost in the trees as you're passing by on the right hand side when you're getting ready. So that's that's the the the most common place that we allow for banners. There's I think maybe one or two others. And can I ask them a question? Do you you plan to put a banner up and you would like to wave that fee as well? Yes.

Okay. I I have a question. So, uh Brad, you said that in the past council has waved uh fees possibly for other nonprofits. Can you give us any examples? Um well, in Riverside Park, the the Pow-Wow um was one that was done a couple years ago. Um, that's the first one that comes to mind. Um, do you happen to remember on what what grounds or what what explanation we gave for what? Uh, I don't I don't. These are 100% discretionary decisions. Uh, you know, up to the council.

Okay. Uh, any other questions from council for Brad? Okay. Uh, seeing none, anyone from the public want to speak for against us? Yeah. Step right up. Okay.

Jenny Stigmiller. I live in the county and own property in the city. Um, we really wanted to request the So, wait, let me back up just a little bit. Brad was correct when he said that this event was started by the real estate agents, the realtors, Grants Pass Realtors Association back in 19 um 89, I believe, is the information that I have right now. it ended. They stopped uh due to some political reasons, splitting up, whatever. Somewhere around um 2018ish after that um nobody picked it up for a year or two. Then we had COVID and then uh 2021 is when Mark Kelsey picked it up and did it just he and his family and they were doing it over at River uh Redwood Park. They were told they never had to pay a fee. uh if they didn't use any of the facilities. So somehow it worked out that he didn't need to pay the fee. He was still following the rules. So he came to us right around December and said, "This is way too big for me anymore. Would you guys since you've worked hard keeping the parks clean, you're all about the parks and you're all about the kids. Would you be willing to take this on?" So, he's been uh we talked about it and of course we take that on because it's for the kids and we've been cleaning the parks and why wouldn't we do that? So, um he's been working right alongside of us. Here's the issue that we have. We have um no money in the bank because even though we're a nonprofit, we don't go out and fundra for no reason. So, now we have a budget that we need to meet. like you had asked about the a what would happen if we uh got what would go where would the $277 go? We're expected to raise somewhere around $3,800

if we don't get any other donations. So, um I know Rob likes to see budgets. Am I done? Since you're the applicant, I'm going to give you more time. Okay. You're the applicant, right? Sure.

Sorry about that. Um, I did put together a little budget. What happens if we didn't get any donations from anybody? Uh, and it would cost us about $3,800 to put on this event. And we will do it. We'll take it out of our own pockets if we had to. Keeping in mind that we have some people on fixed income. So, it's not going to be easy, but we're not going to um I think Brad mentioned the event won't go away if we don't get our fees waved. So, um, I can't remember anything else that I really wanted to share with you other than we've been keeping the parks clean. It would be a great partnership with the city. If you wanted to help us pay for the banner, we could put your logo on the banner. So, just an offer for you.

Yeah. Thank you. You bet. Anyone else from the public that uh wants to weigh in on this? If not, uh, can turn back to council for any discussion? Uh, Victoria. Well, I'd just like to uh thank Parkwatch for this and I would like to move to approve the resolution to grant the waiver uh for the park reservation fees um for Riverside Park for the 2026 community Easter egg hunt event for the $277.50. Okay, we got a second from Seth and any discussion? Okay, there's um Indra.

Yeah, what a great event and thank you for picking this up and what you're asking is such a small thing that the city can help you with. So, I'm so for it.

Okay. I just like to clarify one thing, you know. Um I I don't remember exactly what the terms were when we we waved before. Um I I I don't want to set a precedent that's saying that when we have a good cause that we would wave the damage deposit. In this case, uh I personally would feel good about doing that because Parkatch uh does more good to the park than they do harm to the park overall in the course of the year and the city is the net gain for sure. But moving forward, I I don't like setting the precedent that we remove the damage deposit for other for other nonprofits. Um but so again, I I I'm because it's the group that is actually really helping us with our parks, I feel good about doing that in this case. And anything else? Um, so Victoria, uh, how do you vote?

Yes. Joel, yes. Eric, absolutely. Yes. Uh, yes. Kathleen, of course. Yes. And Seth, yes. And Rick, yes. Great. Unanimous. Thank you.

Okay. Next is uh what motion appointing one member to the committee on public art. I think there's a yellow page in front of us and I am going to you can hand those down and uh do you to total these or do I still

more on. All right, AI is going to be done in a minute here with our results. Oh, and uh do we hear from Rick on this or

uh Rick, do you have a preference on uh committee on public art choice? Do you are you up to Yes, I do. I have a Yes, I have a preference for Cindy Hernandez. Okay. Thank you. Five. Okay. Okay. So, council has a uh a choice. Uh Cindy Hernandez uh five votes and uh Corey Wy got three votes. And do we have a a motion on who we want to uh appoint? Uh Indra, I'll make a motion to appoint Cynthia Hernandez. Second from Seth. And um do we need any discussion on that? No. Okay. Indra, how do you vote?

Yes. Seth? Yes. Victoria? Yes. Joel? Yes. Eric? Yes. Yes. And Kathleen? No. And Rick? Yes. Okay. 7 to one for Cindy Hernandez. Thank you. Okay. Okay, now we go to public comment for anyone that's handed in a blue page and at the top here is Byron Robertson.

Good evening. Good evening, Byron Robertson, Josephin County. Two quick points or suggestions. One would be to maybe lax the blue card requirement for people who actually work a little bit later or maybe have to go home and feed their families before they come here. If they want to speak public comment, they can hand it at any time before this point. The other one is maybe increase it to 3 minutes. 2 minutes I know is rush to try to get something through when you have something to say. I know sometimes counselors struggle for five or 10 minutes to get questions and stuff out. So it would be nice to give everybody 3 minutes quickly. Leadership the ability of an individual group to influence, guide and/or inspire others towards the achievement of a common goal. Done with influence, not authoritarian. Empower people. Direct direction that aligns with a goal and then commit to that goal and then have long-term vision. All this must be done with integrity, emotional intelligence, decisive actions, and have adaptability. Who's the leaders of us city? We need to take a strong look. I have some examples. The non-bargaining task force issue has gone on for almost a year now, and we keep going back and forth. HR and in my opinion the city manager led that charge, led the the consultant and probably jump fumbled that ball and now here we are still trying to pick it up. We're starting over. Um no leadership over the last 18 years took it to take a look at that. I've had multiple conversations with um Jason Kennedy public works director and voice my my opinions and my concerns. He's been very gracious to listen to me vent and bring those to him. The Al Plaza that's about to start. Huge fumble. You guys downtown had no idea it was coming. Even when asked in pre-bid in November, have they been notified? And we were

told at that time, yes, 75% of the cards came back. No one followed up. Those people don't even know what's coming. Someone needs to step forward and take charge and be leaders here.

Thank you, Byron. Thank you. And um let's see. Ra Brown. Rick Brown, 1415 Southwest Bridge Street, Grants Pass. Kudos to the Daily Courier and writer Vicky Aldis for exposing the consultant hired by our city manager regarding payraises for himself and other non-union staff. The consultant was asked to create midsize raises and delivered high raises. This reminds me of Water and Sewer Rate Consultants, FCS Group, hired in 2005 that by then city manager David Frasier. In 2008, our public works director couldn't pay the overhead and asked the council to raise the base rate by $3 to fix the problem. It didn't because they didn't lower unit rates, which were most of the bill. FCS eventually hiked our water rates every year 5.28% above inflation to pay the overhead and councils rubber stamped it. In April 2020, I sent a memo to city staff about changing the rate system back to put putting all overhead costs in the base rate and charging only unit costs to unit rates, the way it was when our city was clean, green, and beautiful and far from wildfire. FCS sent me a memo admitting on the first page that aligning fixed costs overhead with base rates would make revenue more stable and water usage cost less per per unit, encouraging water in the growing season.

FCS never said what was wrong with watering. 99% of the cost of any utility is overhead. Usage costs are tiny in comparison and vary greatly by season. Paying for all plant overhead with base rates pays the bills every month. Didn't quite make it. Thank you. Uh Valerie Blackwood. Great.

Uh Valerie Blackwood. I live in Grants Pass. Uh, thank you all for your time. Um, I'm the ice cream lady here or one of the ice cream ladies here in Grants Pass. And when they made the rules, it was very long ago when our children could go outside and play in the streets and ride their bikes and stuff. But most children don't do that anymore. They stay in their homes because their parents are terrified they're going to be child trafficked or whatever. My kids are, my grandkids are. The only place that they can find me is in the park. And now I wasn't able to go in the park last year. My business is failing. I'm not going to be able to do it. If I can't go into the parks because in the parks I get to see them. When they're in their neighborhoods, they're not coming out. I've tried. Very few of the kids come out. So, I don't know if having a ice cream lady in Grants Pass is important enough for you guys to change the rules, but it'd be very much appreciated. And also, I wanted to offer my services. I in 1988 86 I um started my own business and I've I owned 13 restaurants and I'm a professional. I got sick. I got cancer and closed my businesses or sold. But if you guys need any help with restaurant stuff or want to ask questions because I've seen vendors on the street that are selling the ice and the fruit and stuff that breaks all the rules and it's not fair for people that own restaurants to put thousands of dollars into being in compliance to see that. It's not fair. So I'm available if you need any help. If I don't know how to find out if you guys change their rules or not, would I be contacted?

Um, yeah. Is that is that on a coming agenda? We've talked about it before. Yes. I don't have the agenda in front of me, but Okay. It's on the back schedule. Okay. So, we're right now it's it's not scheduled to be on the agenda in the next two weeks, but uh it we can we can we can discuss that again moving it up. And I I just wanted to ask one question. I know that we're we're looking for applicants for the small business task force. Have you thought of applying with your uh business background? Have I consider applying to the for the small business task force? Have I applied for?

No, we we the city now we're we're we're forming a trying to form a small business task force and it sounds like with your experience it might be something that you would want to I would love to. I'm so bored. My kids are raised my grandkids are getting older. I don't have anything to do. Yeah. All I have is my ice cream kids. Okay. Thank Thank you. So, uh would would she contact Karen to uh try to make that application happen? All right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Um, okay. So, that concludes public comment. We're going on to consent agenda and Indra asked to have a a brief um explanation on item A and authorized city manager. Okay, I guess that would be from the city manager then brief explanation.

Okay, Indra, why? Um, so just looking at this, it was something that was done by council in 2024 and there's a lot to it. It's not it it's changing or doing things to some major intersections and then the bridge. And so for me to be able to vote on it, I would really need much more information. Um, so I couldn't be able to vote on it tonight. I there's there's a lot to it. So, and there's not details in here.

Yeah. So, the this IGA um as you said, previous council pre did already approve the IGA. This is just extending the time frame um because they haven't completed the work. In fact, they haven't even started the work. I'm going to be real honest with you. The DOJ has been backed up and so they haven't gotten a consultant on board yet. Um, and it doesn't it doesn't build anything and it doesn't even it create doesn't even create drawings to build anything. It really does just study this area to figure out the best approach to alleviate traffic at that wonky intersection where Redwood Avenue peels off at Redwood Highway and that section basically from where South Y kind of terminates to Redwood Highway, Redwood Avenue. Um, and so there will be a series of meetings. there's a lot of modeling that gets done with traffic and then they connect roads in different ways and then run the traffic models again and that's kind of what the level of effort is. So it really is more so to come out of there with a concept of what they we can present to you to say would you be interested in doing this this or this? These are the kind of solutions of what we could do. These are the impacts that we think that it would have you know traffic-wise.

So this just extends then the time frame. Correct. It extends and assigns a new project manager. The project manager has retired from ODOT. So it does those two things. So there's been no work done on it. There's no concept. So when you presented it to council before, there was no concept.

So there was a previous concept and that was what was listed in the I think it was option A. I'm not getting the words right. It was it was written in there. There was previously. And so this is refreshing that but also including options for a fourth bridge. And this is the first time that they've agreed to include that to really look at how that affects the traffic patterns in that area. So to all of us who go south of the river in the afternoon, we all know that the south Y is a mess. Um the fourth bridge is really intended to kind of alleviate that South Y bottleneck, but there's also just as soon as you get past the South Y, it is pretty much bumperto-bumper all the way out to the Redwood Highway, Redwood Avenue convergence. Um, and so it really is trying to fix that as well. And it's just we have to look at a lot of different options to kind of see what could alleviate that. Um, because it's complicated and it doesn't touch the South Y. I'm going to be real honest. This study does not look at the South Y. It's from the South Y basically onward.

Thank you. Mhm. I think just for me, the counselors who were on council then know what those concepts are. But for me to not even know what the concepts are before spending staff time and money going forward, I would just like to see I would like more a workshop or more information on what those concepts are before I would agree. Okay. vote for giving more staff time towards that because we might have new ideas or or something on that.

And if I could clarify and maybe I said it incorrectly because I do that and I apologize. Um this is actually to create concepts. So DOT is going to draw lines all over the place to try and connect things in different ways in that area to try and figure out ways to alleviate the traffic problem. So it's not banking on any one concept. It's going to be basically looking at all different concepts and then as they rank those that will be what comes out of the report that we'll bring back to you for your evaluation and approval. Okay. Thank you. Yeah.

Okay. With that uh clarification, do I have a motion to approve the consent calendar from Kathleen? I make a motion. Great. to approve consent agenda. A second from Victoria. That was close. Kathleen, how do you vote? Yes. Yes. Seth, yes. Victoria, yes. Joel, yes. Eric, yes. I vote yes. And Rick, yes. Thank you.

All right. And now we're moving on to uh matters from mayor and council. The Indra Okay, Byron, that was great timing because I had this on my radar for tonight, too. So, I know a few or one counselor might um groan, but I agree. Historically, we had the three minutes and I hear that a lot that that people would like to move back to that. Um obviously when we have large groups we're able to um cut that to 30 minutes and then give less time for that. But you know what we have two meetings a month they the public can't comment at our workshops. So only at our meetings and I think to to there sometimes there's complex issues that they want to talk about and are cut off and sending emails are is not the same as coming in person and speaking. So if you're making the effort, look who's here to actually come and speak. I don't think 3 minutes is too much to ask. Um, so I would be I'm just asking if council would con reconsider um going to three minutes um knowing that if there are a lot of people to talk, we can then vote to reduce the time so everyone can speak. And I also agree um I know that the blue card should be able to be handed in up until public speaking time. I know we talked about that before too and Karen uh said uh that it, you know, it it was a little more difficult but not impossible. And I just think we should extend that courtesy to our constituents

that actually try to come here and get here a little late and then they're they're cut off because they're 1 minute after 6. I just don't think that's right. So, I would like to know if we can if if I have any other support to reconsider the three minutes and the blue cards. Um, Victoria, is that a is that support or is that a comment?

Well, yeah, it's a it's a comment. I don't I don't have an issue. I never had an issue with um making it 3 minutes again or having people be able to hand in their cards a little bit later. In fact, I think I even suggested that um earlier because people do have to come to the meeting later. So, I just wanted to say that I I have not ever had a problem with that. Uh I think the only provisal would be if there were too many if if the if there were way too many comments um then maybe there would need to be a number. If there are like 50 people who want to speak, then maybe it would need to be put back to the two minutes. But um that's how I feel about that.

Okay. Um I I too would be a third counselor that um I'm not sure how I feel about the the three minutes, but u I've been vocal several times about the fact that the blue cards should be allowed right up until um public comment. And uh Byron, you the comments you made tonight about people that are actually working or people that got to feed their families first or whatever. People shouldn't have to rearrange their entire day to get here hours earlier to speak for two or three minutes at a council meeting. And uh Byron, I I I feel your pain tonight. Back in 2008 or seven, I believe, I waited almost three hours one time at a meeting just to speak. And um you know it was a little different back then, but I know it's just it's it's awesome that you were willing to do it tonight and I know you're a busy guy and I know that your time is actually valuable from a dollar perspective. So uh you actually gave up some money and time tonight to be here. So and it shouldn't have to be that hard. I mean wh why? There's no advantage to it being that hard. So I would agree that with for certainly that the blue cards and I think I've said it twice before should be uh until public comment. But so we've got three counselors now. So, we should be able to get that on a future agenda. Um, and hopefully, uh, we can get that message to either Aaron or Clint, whoever puts that on the agenda, or I'll bring it to the next agenda study meeting. Um, anything else from Kathleen?

Yeah, I wanted to give a little update on the Parker Place Village. Uh we had our second oversight committee panel uh meeting this last Friday and uh this is where things stand with that right now. Um the site has been evaluated for the mature trees which ones are going to take out and which ones are going to leave. Um, civil site plans were completed and handed in to the building department and uh I just got word that the building department is approving that this week. So, they should be getting back to uh Elk Island. I know that uh we had a meeting with Bernie today and he said that uh he had his men lined up to start the work next week. Um apparently uh he's met with uh an employee from ADAPT regarding treatment coordination and maintaining placement for guests completing treatment. So he's talking to agencies in the community to make that happen. Um he's had the first uh non-converted conx container delivered to the property which we looked at today and he described you know sort of how he was going to remodel that and what was that was going to entail. He has um produced a draft resident handbook and community fact and question sheet. Uh that probably would be on his Facebook page, Parker's Place Village Facebook. Um I don't know where else that could be obtained at the moment. I know all of us

That was Mint's draft. So it's Elk Island and Mint. Okay.

Thank you. Mhm. And uh the architectural building unit plans have been formally submitted. Um structural analysis for concrete footing and foundation is pending. Um he submitted uh paperwork for the shower and toilet facility plans and materials are on hand to begin the conversions for the ConX containers. Um, one observation I had was um that uh there were some deadlines. Uh, February 1st, uh, there was going to be site prep, utilities, pads, fencing, gate, conx conversions, and restroom, shower construction would be beginning. Um, there was no evidence of that today. Um, yeah. So the public can uh dialogue with this project through their Facebook page and through a email address which would be Parker'splacevillage@gmail.com.

Right, Joel. Thanks, Kathleen. Uh just real quick, um you know, the Chamber of Commerce had a good uh survey of the community that we're going to get our own presentation, so I won't spend much time there, but um there was two economists there from the state of Oregon and uh I I I sent an email to them and they've responded back with several sites and I just want to we'll periodically give you some updates on some of the statistics economically for Josephine County. Um and so in the last two years, unlike income, income stayed pretty steady, but the number of private establishments for all industries in Josephine County declined by um 10 over 10%. And that was coincident with COVID uh and also with the uh uh unhoused issue. Um unlike the rest of the country, it hasn't recovered. It's still going down. the number of um industries. Um it's the longest, steepest, largest decrease in 35 years. Um which makes our efforts on urban renewal and other areas uh like the northwest part of town. Um very important uh and and I think we're going to see a rebound and it's going to turn around. We've just taken a lot longer than the rest of the country. Um, so what Kathleen reported on is very important, not only for the humane side of it, but the economic side of it. And then some of our uh our efforts to revive the local economy are also very important. And what's most important at all is the local entrepreneurs that uh will do a good job given the chance. So, it's interesting. If you're interested in those statistics, let me know. I was going to give a copy to uh Erin and he can share it with his staff if he wants.

Eric.

Yeah. Just uh coming back to the Easter egg hunt uh for the 4th of April. I just wanted to give a shout out to Park Watch. They do a great job cleaning our parks. I was just wondering if um uh before the Easter egg hunt uh on April 4th, if the city staff uh whoever we the park uh branch uh would be willing to help clean that up kind of like a preclean so that they can go through and um have their Easter egg hunt. And I'm sure Parkw Watch is going to is going to help with that as well. I just don't know if there's anything in in mind for that. Steph.

Um yeah, just back to Parker's place. Um I think Kathleen recapped that meeting fairly well. We did tour um the location today. Um is I was just curious on the permitting is that it it sounds like it's getting close. I did issue the director's decision about I don't know 1:30 2:00 today.

Okay. Bear in mind that that's there's a difference between the decision for an emergency shelter under the OS 197 clause and building permits. Um, just to be clear, you know, from a from our side, from the community development staff standpoint, there's there's essentially the authorization for the shelter, um, which gives them the findings that they do meet the criteria according to the state statute for emergency shelters. There's a condition attached to it that says they need to still submit the permits themselves um to go through for the for the bath and shower building. Yeah.

Um which we have not seen um detailed architectural plans for. So there's a condition that says they have to just go through that process, but the rest of it they're sounds like they're good to go. Yeah. and also the grading, you know, the the grading plans. But in terms of the review of of the site plan and compliance with the state statute for emergency shelter, um we we did issue that and it's posted on our website and we can certainly send out the decision, but okay. So, there's a couple more steps before they could actually, you know, physically do the the the construction piece. Okay, great. And

I just wanted to thank uh Corey Wy. We've seen Corey's name a few times um applying for committees and I I and I'm sure we all appreciate um if you're still listening or listening your willingness to jump into committees and learn things and don't give up. And we have extended the application time for the small business task force. Um, so if you're interested in that, I hope you'll apply and I hope other people will apply. So, we have a lot to choose from. Thank you.

That's uh all council has tonight. St. Oh, Eric more. Yeah, I don't I didn't I didn't hear anything from the staff in terms of a pre-clean for the for the parks if that's going to happen or if that's up to basically Park Watch to take care of as there are little kids that are going to be involved with that. And we know the drug usage in the parks are pretty bad right now. So, just wanted to see what if there's anything that the city's going to offer for that. We we make sure especially before the weekends that we do an excellent job of making sure that the parks are clean and ready to go and be utilized for all users of the parks and that will be there will be no exception to that on that weekend also.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Okay, so turning it over to staff matters from staff. Stephanie,

I just have just a little bit more about Parker's Place. I know that's been a big topic. Um, I did have had some pretty significant conversations with Bernie over the recent times and he does still anticipate meeting that June 1st timeline. Um, he's been doing a whole lot behind the scenes. Um, funding has been going out so that he can buy materials, has things staged, ready to go as soon as uh the necessary approvals are there. Um, there were some delays in approvals and permitting due to additional needs that were discovered as they went through the process. So, um, some additional paving, some storm water issues that had to be worked out. So, everybody's been working very diligently to resolve these issues, get everything moving forward and as quickly as possible. And last I heard, we're still on track for June 1st. You will be receiving um the February update probably in the next either late this week or early next week. His report status update is due on March 7th. So, I did reach out to him to get that and he's usually usually gets that to me within a couple of days. So, that should be coming to your email very soon.

And Brad, uh, you received public comment tonight about commercial activity in the parks. I just I did want to refer the council to council memo um 005-2026 um February 4th. There was three pages there that kind of touches on the overall commercial activity in the parks as well as this the the specific ice cream activity. So, um there's there's a lot of explanation there about the codes and um kind of puts it back in your seat if you would like to direct staff to proceed with any kind of amendment. Yeah, thank you for that clarification and reminder. Um anything else? Are we uh done for tonight?

Okay, we got a motion to adjurnn. I make a motion to adjurnn. Thank you. We have a second. Joel, we are adjourned. Oh. Um, yeah.