City Council - Regular Meeting

um to look at options and uh it the the the last word or the last phrase in this first bullet um the property assure that the such property shall not be inadvertently transferred, sold, demolished, substantially altered or allowed to deteriorate. State agencies and political subdivisions may and are encouraged to lease real property of historic significance to private businesses and nonprofit organizations for purposes which are consistent with the nature of the property. And then where possible, the Oregon Department of Administrative Services shall acquire or lease buildings of historic significance. So you'll see one of the options on the back on the last slide is to is to remand this back to HBSC. HBSC was, you know, aware of this statute and that's, I think, part of what was informing their recommendation to you to move ahead with some kind of preservation. Um, it is in the statute. Um, so that uh that doesn't 100% prelude demolition. Um, other communities have done that. Uh, but you do have to go through these steps, work with private parties, see if you can find opportunities to preserve it that way. um and then uh if not approach the state and to see if the department of administrative services shall acquire or lease the building. So those steps need to be taken first. Here's the cost implications, expenses to date. Um we've, you know, spent um around $6,000 $7,000 uh to evaluate and uh look at the asbestous and lead paint surveys. Um, in terms of budget resources, we currently have in the LB project, uh, a little over $393,000. That is for all of Riverside Park improvements. That includes the maintenance shop and the building, as

well as, um, any other larger type capital projects. Um, and then we have 1.7 million of, uh, money allocated in the urban renewal plan. We also have received a $15,000 grant from the state to hire an architect to do design services. That is a grant that is um made available for uh historic resource properties. Um and we can use them to do some uh mockups and some analysis on the architectural side. Uh we haven't we haven't started that because uh you know we think it's a little premature until exactly what the council decides to do with the building. We're hiring an architect and we don't know what to tell them to do. So so that money um does need to be spent fairly soon. Uh but we have informed the state that we're still going through this process. And then we we uh we did hear from George Kramer about grants and he was relatively confident is how I would interpret it about the city's ability to to to get some grant money to um rehab rehabilitate the building. So next steps staff is recommending the council first make the policy decision about overnight camping. If you decide to allow overnight camping, a public hearing uh will need to be scheduled for amending title six and you would have a couple of options there. That first one to limit overnight camping to just Riverside Park for this project um or allow overnight camping in all the parks. If the decision is to not allow overnight camping, then the council will need to make a motion to not proceed with Elk Island Trading on their current proposal. And then that takes us to what some of your other options might be if you decided to go

that route. So one would be if you decide to proceed, proceed with our negotiations with Elk Island. Again, the main outstanding item there being figuring out the relationship of the maintenance yard expansion to the yurts and sort of that orientation on the site. Um and then we would another option is to reissue the requests for expressions of interest. Um solicit other proposals. We you could direct staff to identify funds to repair and conserve the cottage. And I already went over that at OS there that kind of gives the legal framework for that. remand the topic to HBSC uh for their consideration, more input, uh put on a workshop or um take no action. Any stand for any questions? Thank you, Brad. I will bring it back to council with questions. Um do you want to jump in first? Go ahead, Joel. Joel.

Okay. I I I just wondered why would an alternative be to allow camping in all parks? That that that seems ridiculous to me. Well, where did that come from? It it certainly didn't come from the historic commission. No, it did not. It did not. Where'd it come from, Brad? Well, the alternatives um when you're opening up the municipal code for amendment, I mean, you know, and you have a current code that says prohibited in all park in all parks. Mhm. Um an alternative would be to, you know, allow it, but I I agree with you. It's not

Yeah. So, it came from um city staff who were looking at code amendments and thought that an alternative would be to allow camping in all parks. Is that what I heard you say? Yes. But remember, this staff isn't recommending things. We're just putting alternatives. Yeah. Well, that that that isn't even in the the the realm of uh the concept of what we're talking about. Anyway, okay. Yeah, I interpret that as that staff looked at that as the point of least resistance to get from point A to point B if you wanted to change the code. So, you change the code across the board instead of in each individual park, but it was not a recommendation. No. No. Okay. Thank you. Uh, further questions. Rob,

actually to comment on what you just sent, Clint, when you said you staff looked at that as the point of least resistance, I would actually look at that as the point of most resistance. Quite frankly, least resistance would have been just to do Riverside. Most resistance would have been done to all of it. my opinion. But um so Brad, you just said that um uh the um it could be up to council to direct staff to um come up with funding, I guess, to continue to maintain the um uh the cottage and so forth. And um you know it said in the state the state law that you just read that um the city um shall not uh inadvertently allow this property to deteriorate. And we know for 10 years that's exactly what happened. So, I guess my my question is why why is it up to council to to essentially tell staff to to um uh come up with funds to maintain this building when in fact that's the state law. That should have been I'm asking that that should actually be in our budget every year, right? Because that would be following the law. That would have been up to the budget officer to make sure that that's in there, would it not be?

Well, a couple of thoughts on that. One is that law would not have pertained to this project until 2020 because it wasn't deemed a significant historic resource until it was added to the National Register, which was not until 2020. So, we're really only talking about this law being pertinent since that point. Um, to your second point, yes. Um, you know, there are funds of course that are in the operational budget for the parks department uh to to maintain the building and um, you know, I don't think it would what we're saying is the council needs to direct that those funds be spent. If if in fact you know you decide today that the it should continue to remain a city asset and it's under the responsibility of the parks division to maintain that then we'll we'll continue to look at you know preservation. We'll we'll look at some other ways that to ensure that it doesn't continue to deteriorate. So that that would be part of what we do moving ahead.

Thank you. Further questions Rick.

Thank you Brad. So, do I remember over the years, so when we've had this discussion um in addressing lead and asbestous and just the general upgrade and repair of the building, we were tossing around a figure of $500,000. Does that and the also there was the offering because it the type of structure it is and the history it has could be available for significant grants. Um, are you saying that the 500,000 was a figure that we put out there for what it would take to do the remediation? I don't I don't I don't remember that.

I thought in that price I thought that was just tossed out there. It wasn't official. Um, an estimate of what it would take to upgrade the building, including re remediation. Do you remember of us discussing that amount? Um, I I don't. I'm sorry. It doesn't mean that we did that. That's fine. All right. Thank you. All right. Further questions. Uh, Kathleen. Nope. Just comments. Thank you, Joel. Do you have any further questions? Victoria.

So, is this on the national registry or is is it considered otherwise significant? Is there a difference between those two uh determinations or is it all one big pot?

Yeah, there there is a difference. Okay. Um yeah, and when the Riverside Park got added to the National Registry, um there was a number of different, you know, structures within the park. And by by the fact that the park itself got added, then any structures within there um also become part of the National Register. It's kind of a weird nuance that's in the in the law, but the the building itself didn't get I guess my point is it wasn't like we applied for just that structure,

but because it's within the park boundary, um it has the same protective rights as as as though it were in freestanding. And then you said that there are other communities who have taken down structures in this circumstance. Um do you have any um what would that take just generalities or if you don't know right now that's fine too.

Yeah. Well it it takes you know going through a process similar to that we're doing now to demonstrate to the state that the city has made a strong and valid attempt to preserve the building through a private partnership um and then look for other ideas to preserve the structure. So maybe that would be putting money towards it and then using it as a as a as another city asset. Um if at the end of all that the answer is we really don't have any solutions then the HBSC would have to hold a public hearing to demolish a structure that's on the register. And was the last question then. Was the building on the property when the park when was the park um first made? That puts it on the national registry?

Uh 2020. Oh, okay. It was 2020. And the building was there at that time. Yes. Yes. Yep. The building's more or less original to, you know, going back to the early 1900s. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Further questions. Eric,

thank you for the presentation. Had a question in terms of the survey if uh it's appropriate to talk about right now. Uh but number four there it says additional comments and some of the responses from the community that took that uh survey. Did the staff see any good uh possibilities or alternatives that uh would be realistic that uh that the council could perhaps uh pursue or I mean cuz I see a lot of responses here and um I see some of them that say turn it into a coffee house and others turn it into a beer garden. Whatever. Realistically, is there something that um that the uh staff feels that uh the council can can go pursue?

Right. Right. Yeah. No. And we have we have not at staff level um really taken a hard look or feasibility analysis on those alternatives that were given. So we we could, you know, we could certainly do that, but again, you know, a lot of that is dependent on do we have a a private party who's willing to to partner with us. And when we put out the original request for expressive interest, you know, we just had the two respondents. So um but I guess the short answer is no. We have we haven't done that at staff level.

Okay. Thank you. Further questions, Seth? All right. And I have Indra online. Andrea, do you have questions? Yes. Um, going back to the overnight camping, um, when you say if we allowing camping in Riverside Park, we c can we allow just that area for camping and not the whole park? Like just the yurts and not the whole park. We can do that, right? Yes. Yes, you could. Thank you. Yep. All right, further questions. Uh Joel,

I was just wondering on the survey that was a 10% response. Um how does that compare with other surveys? What kind of response is that? Was that about average? I would guess it's about average, but I don't know. It seems low to me. 10%. On the neighborhood one. Um well, either one. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the the citywide one of course is much below 10%. Um, but the neighborhood one, right, we mailed to 211, got 20 responses. I think I would say that's slightly higher than what we see on a lot of surveys.

Okay. It surprises me that it's so low. Um, the other question I had um and and we can cover it during discussion. Um the applicant uh put in some um additional information to you um and um it uh uh I just happened to get a hold of it. So I shared it with everybody. Um and that's probably something that in in terms of being open and candid with everybody, we need to make sure that the council's aware of that when we get to information. Uh the I in terms of how how we put that into a question is um I guess there's more information. There is more information that needs to be part of our discussion. Is that correct?

Yes. Are you referring to Mr. Woodard's email on Friday? Yes, sir. Yes. And that is attached to the packet and I did make reference to that at the beginning. Good. Yeah. That's that's on the back. I I'm late coming here so bear with me.

Sure. But I did send it uh I didn't see it in my email that you that uh that you'd send it out ahead of time and so I I went ahead an hour before this meeting and sent it out uh which probably isn't adequate time for review but I did. All right. Uh last call questions. All right. See none. Thank you Bradley. Uh bring it back to council for further discussion. Joel. So, one of the things, and I'll try to be brief. Um, this weekend I we it was our 52nd wedding anniversary. That's not the way to start out being brief, but it was a really good time. And uh, one of the things we did was I've administered public land for over 35 years and and uh, working with the private sector has been a big part of that. And so we started off down at Caligans's Lodge and then we went through the the uh plateau there um and the Cascades to Fish Lake. A concessionire uh maintains that. Taxpayer dollars do not. The concessionire takes care of it. They serve the public. They um they uh actually do a great job. And uh we had apple pie there and it and there was a lot of business and Aaron I think next time you go mushroom hunting up there you need to stop by there because the concession area does a great job. It's in in in partnership with the government. Then we went through uh but falls and uh went over to Prospect went up to Becky's. Well at Becky's it used to be Union Creek um district ranger district and um that all the ranger district was all government buildings there. There were five houses, warehouses, and um and then the CCC uh built a lot of them. They're historic.

And uh Forest Service went through budget reduction. Um staff generally likes to um use taxpayer dollars to uh maintain these buildings. Um and they kind of resist putting it in a private and and that's understandable. Um, but it doesn't work uh over the long term if you get a get a uh a partnership with the private sector that maintains these buildings for you and it also provides some economic activity over the long term. Perhaps not in the short term. Uh perhaps not something that we want to do this year, but that that is um a thing that staff tends to resist. Um I'm not talking about city staff. I'm talking about all all government employees. Government does not do a good job at making profit. I'm sorry to say that. And I've been part of government for a long time. Um the private sector when they put in a proposal, they don't do it because they're just spending taxpayer dollars and they got the dollars to spend to make a nice public thing. They do it because they're going to make money off of it and serve people. And the way they make money is by serving people that people are willing to pay for and and have it be nice. Uh whether you're a restaurant or whatever. And that's what the public or the private sector does. So we went went up there and we sold we uh we didn't sell. We we leased all of Union Creek Resort used to be the district ranger. All those buildings. There was 10 of them and including Becky's restaurant. What is now Becky's restaurant. We went up to Beck Becky's restaurant and ate and it was packed. Um, in the summertime, tour buses from Japan stop there and eat. Um, the resource that they have up there is

not the Rogue River and the Jetboats. It's the entrance way to Crater Lake. Um, when I looked over across the street where all the government buildings were that are now leased out to the public, it was amazing. It was just a a a a pool of economic activity of people enjoying their public lands. Um and so not only did it pay for the maintenance of the buildings instead of them being demolished, it provided jobs. Um so next time you go by Becky's, keeping it short, this is too long, buy Huckleberry Pie. They're the only ones that have it with wild huckleberries. and they're a private company.

Okay. Thank you, Joel. Can you bring it full circle to your point because I'm I'm still the first full circle is um to spend taxpayer dollars to maintain the caretaker's cottage is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Thank you. And uh the way if you want to preserve your history, which is important, you got to you got to serve with the with the private sector and you got to have a purpose and meaning that that improve other people's lives through a recreational experience or whatever. And we got to overcome I had to overcome staff resistance to um doing that because they like to they like to increase taxpayer dollars to get the job done. Okay, I think I understood your point. Uh any further discussion, Kathleen?

Well, what I'm hearing loud and clear from the public is that they do not want camping. They do not want overnight uh housing in the park. Um and I mean line after line, this is what I'm reading here in all of the surveys and a few of them are quite for demolishing the building. So I'm listening to the public and I just am not in favor of housing or overnight camping in this park. Thank you. Further discussion, Victoria,

I would um I wrote a few of those points that kind of echo what Kathleen said. Uh it looks like 65% if you add the neutral or not important together. How important is it that you uh it be preserved? So that's and then 75% say they do not want overnight accommodations in Riverside Park. So it's exceedingly clear that what that answer is and um so I also would be listening to the public on this matter. Um they don't want it and so the public should get what they want there. And um I also just a little bit to what Joel was saying Mary's and is such an iconic spot. I mean people but it's also on the way to to Crater Lake

which is which is a destination that people from all over the world go to and I they do here too uh into our little city but I don't think they would come direct they might come to do the jetboats or something like that from all over the world which they do but I'm not sure they would come uh for camping in Riverside Park. So I think there's a difference between those two uh sorts of but I I understand what you're talking about when you say that um you know private business in maintaining some of these historic that it shouldn't be overlooked but I would I would say that these two are in completely different categories. Um, but I do understand your point. But yeah, I just wanted to reiterate that the survey is pretty darn clear and so I I think we should honor the survey and I would not be for overnight camping. Thank you.

Further discussion, Eric.

So, I would agree with uh what was discussed about the survey. the public is saying they don't want it regardless of it being isolated to Riverside. Uh also what Joel was talking about there with uh the private sector getting involved. I'm not uh sure exactly how that's going to um work out, but it it definitely works better than what government usually does. Um, one thing that that I find interesting is the the whole model of the Airbnb with the yurts. Uh, to me it seemed to be very pricey and I'd be it would be I think it would be hardressed to find anybody that would be willing to pay a price to live in a to to stay in at night in a in a yurt for that amount of money. I I believe it was over uh over $100 a night. Um I remember seeing something in our emails from another Airbnb owner that had written us um mayor and counsel that said that there's no way that this that that spending model would work. um specifically u the the amount of money they are having a hard time getting uh people to get their Airbnb. Um basically they they're they're having a hard time getting people to come in and and stay overnight at their Airbnb. What would be the difference? Uh you know at that price that's more than what they were paying for. Anyway, this was in the uh in in the in an email. So, the point was made that um the prices would be way too high. Nobody would want to stay there and um we would have to

the city would have to compete with other issues that are in the in in the uh park whereas the problems go with the drugs and the the homeless and all that other stuff that goes along with that. Why would anybody would want why would anybody want to stay in the park uh with all these problems? And obviously we do have the survey results here as well that uh we had all talked about previously. I think the best possible way possible thing to do would be to find an alternative uh to keep this historic um building put in in place. And uh maybe we can I mean I saw a coffee shop in there. I saw um I saw a beer garden. I saw many other interesting um alternatives. And uh I I don't know which one of them would be uh realistic and that's why I asked the question does staff have any idea of what would work for these for these uh alternatives? But that's that's where I I stand right now. Thank you. Uh further comments I got Indra online and then Rob. Indra.

Yes. Sadly, I think if this discussion was before 2020 or earlier, uh people wouldn't have such problems with camping in the park. And so I understand the hesitation because of all the homeless and the trash camping that we've had. Um so I I understand the hesitation to have any camping in the park. But I think um if you do look around uh to other state and county parks where there are private uh public partnerships, it works very well. And then I was speaking with um talked a while back the mayor of Phoenix, they're developing their parkway along the river. The more activity you have, wholesome activity, the less homeless and problems you have. I mean, so if we do something with it, we're not going to have the amount of of homeless and drugs and and garbage going on that we have now. I I truly believe that and that's been borne out. I am totally in favor of preserving the caretaker cottage. I think we need to uh tradition and heritage is very important and especially in a a town like Grants Pass. So whatever we do, I would be for preserving the cottage. And as Joel said, really the best way to preserve it with zero zero taxpayer dollars because taxpayer dollars or taxpayers don't want to continually pay money to support this is to do a public private partnership. So I believe that is a must. And you can't staff can't come up and we we can't come up with what we think is nice. Oh, a coffee shop or a museum or this or that. It has to be the private sector, someone who's willing to put

their money where their mouth is and make an offer to do it. And so when we put this proposal out, uh we had two offers only one and which is sad. I I wish we had more to choose from. We had two, one of which was not viable, um is my understanding. So, we were left with one. I think now that we're speaking of it and we've had the surveys and people are more aware of that of what we're looking to do that perhaps um extending or putting out another proposal would draw more interest maybe and we would have more selection of what to do. So maybe that would be a solution um to the problem. Those are just some of my thoughts.

Thank you. Further discussion, I got Rob, uh, Joel, and Victoria. Rob?

Yeah, I think Andrew makes a great point that, um, it really doesn't make much difference of whether or not staff thinks there's a viable alternative. We're talking viable, we're talking about who's going to pay for it, who's going to see it as a profit-making thing. And that's up to the private sector person or entity that's going to do that. if they think they can do it and they they pull it off, it makes no difference really what the rest of us think of whether or not it's it's viable. Um, socially acceptable is a different a different question. But, um, I think that from the survey, one of the the largest points I think that I think we probably all see is that u the last survey I guess is uh 95 out of 169 people actually think it's reasonable for the city to spend money on this project. So obviously the the survey um uh respondents um are in support of that. But the other thing that I'm wondering we see um uh Bernie and Ward in the uh in the seating today and I'm I'm just I'm assuming they didn't just come to listen and I just you know want to know if they have anything that might help clarify this for for council because I know you guys got to be here for a reason. So is that appropriate? you want to ask questions or you want their

I don't necessarily have a specific question, but I think they're probably they probably have something they might want to add. So, I guess that would be my question. Do you have anything you want to add?

Well, hi guys. Um, thanks for letting me speak. Um, it's been a busy last few months. Um the uh Caretaker Cottage is a beautiful little cottage there and I go by it every day from M Street to uh where we're converting the ConX's to um the Redwood Highway where we'll have Parker's Place Village. And every day when I drive by there to go back and forth to the projects, I'm looking and saying, "Would this be a better looking project if the yard was expanded all the way out to the street?" and I I have to say no. Um, a lot of the a lot of it I look at and say it's just a caretaker cottage. Who really cares anyway? But when I look at it this way is like, okay, I know what we can do with it. I know we can make it attractive to the community. And when I drive by there, I'm like, I know that if if an example of a yard was put in comparison with Yurts and a caretaker's cottage in a survey, I can't see where anybody down that street or any place else would want that to become a yard for the for the uh maintenance yard. And you saw, I think on the next to last slide or two slides back, how far that yard might be expanded. And so I think what our project would do is it would disguise that or hide the yard. Even if the yard was extended a little bit to where they needed it, then our project could could go around that where the city, the people driving by, the people on the bike path or the sidewalk would be able to see something nice, not a yard. And then a lot of the survey, so I think the I think the survey and I and I love the staff in this city. I mean, they've worked really well with us. Um, but I I think the survey was kind of tweaked a little bit towards not telling all about what it could be, the alternative of

here's how it could be expanded into this yard with equipment that's going to be running early in the morning and things like that. And here's what it could look like with the earths in a caretaker cottage. And so I I would just ask that you guys look at that part. And then the the part about Airbnbs, it's the location. I mean, location of Riverside Park is that's a beautiful park. You guys may not understand how beautiful your park is unless you go to Roseberg and you look at our parks and then you'll see all of the mess. But you guys have done a great job u of of getting these parks clean. And I know the word camping. I I know that word myself from up there. Camping in the parks is just a terrible word to me. And but you know, we're talking about glamping. We're talking about something that's nice. We're talking about people will be able to go in here. People will have reunions here. People will have anniversaries here. Uh people will have business retreats here. Those kind of things. As far as Airbnb history, I probably have one of the best Airbnb histories out there as far as promoting properties. uh we uh we have a school and a church in a little town of only 200 people in Southern Illinois. In the last three months, almost every room we've had or every bed has been booked in a town of 200 people. So, it's just location and the need. And I believe Riverside Park with all the stuff that Rogue River uh has for people, Tap Rock Cafe or the restaurant there, places for them to go to, I think it will be a draw and people will want to be there. And then by having those things there, then we'll be able to improve Caretaker Cottage. We'll be able to save it. We'll be able to create something that's long-term to be able to be financially feasible to keep it. And it'll be something for the community to enjoy. Um, I I answered the RFI because you guys wanted expressions of interest of people that had ideas and I

thought I had a good idea and that's why I brought it. It's, you know, it's up to you guys all, you know, if you really want it and, you know, what we want to do. And I'm not and I'm not going to have hurt feelings either way. I mean, I just see it something that we can do and I would like to be a part of it. Um, I'm trying to think as you go through all of the different survey results, there's a lot of different numbers in there and almost everybody was saying that up to $50,000, you know. So, if somehow we could curve the cost of the caretaker cottage to $50,000 for the roof and uh structural repairs and things like that and then that we take responsibility for the other cost. I think that's kind of a a good way to go. We could use the survey numbers like that, but I really think the survey numbers at 10% of the people that got sent out to and then them not all knowing what the alternative could be in that location, it's it's kind of tweaked the wrong way for people to get the right impression of what what's there. So again, I I believe from an Airbnb perspective because I'm not just a homeless guy thing, you know, the the providing how we're going to deal with homelessness. Airbnb and building and historic restorations was where I started doing things and I think we have a good opportunity here and just, you know, hopefully you guys choose to do it. If not, let's, you know, keep looking for other alternatives to save that building. Thank you. Thanks. So, Ward, do you want to give us a little context on the historical value of this property?

Absolutely. Thank you. Um, first of all, I I think that the word camping is a misnomer. I think it's overnight lodging, and I think there's a difference. Camping is what uh the bicycling group is that's coming into the park that the council approved a while back for, I don't know, 150, 200 campers in tents. That's camping. Um this is overnight lodging and it really is um the fact that in 2020 um the historic building and sites commission um you know started pushing to make Riverside Park a national park. I don't know if you realize how huge that is, but it's huge. Designated by the National Park Service as a national register park for one of our local parks. That's huge. Uh it's huge to tourism and people these days are seeking a special experience when they take a vacation. They are wanting to do something different and that's like a big thing today. Let's let's do something really different. Do they want to go stay in an Airbnb in somebody's backyard in a subdivision in Grants Pass? Maybe not. But do they want to stay in a national register park designated by our national park service that is a beautiful park? I think so. I think it would be very popular and I think that we have a big opportunity here for an amazing public private uh partnership. I think it will make the neighborhood safer. Um, I think our police chief has weighed in on the fact uh that that we've heard that areas of town that are run down or uh, you know, blighted or whatever tend to draw more homeless and I see that downtown and around town. And so the more it's improved right there, the less uh

problem that we will have with homeless hanging out there and the area would be fenced off with an attractive fence instead of a chain link or an industrial looking fence. So I think the neighbors, you know, surveys really are dependent not only the information that people are given in the survey, but also the information that they're not given. And in this case, uh, I think one of the most important factors would be, uh, a graphic of what the expanded maintenance yard is going to look like and how beautiful that's going to be for the neighbors to look at, uh, versus a nice area that's manicured, that has a nice, attractive fence, and that's well taken care of. And then uh I don't care for that yellow color that I saw uh in the proposal on the cottage, but that that would go before the historic building and sites commission to be discussed for colors. And uh um but but anyway, I think the intent there was that they just wanted to show that it it was going to be brightened up. And so um I I think that there's a lot of reasons to take a look at this. And I I think going back to the neighborhood and to uh showing them what the difference it would look like as a as a maintenance yard versus what this could look like. And I also think that there are some tweaks that could be made. Uh that really hasn't been discussed, but I would be for I think the fact that um Mr. Woodard has has some experience uh already with overnight lodging, I think that's a good sign. And I think it I think it would be worthwhile uh if you would like to consider remanding this back to the historical building and sites commission to discuss any concerns from the council uh andor staff. Um Brad uh you know mentioned that in some cities they have

managed to tear these kinds of things down. Uh, I'd like to just point out in more cities, they've managed to save them. Uh, because they've said that that um, especially in a a national park, a listed park, that a caretaker's cottage, believe it or not, even though it's not a mansion and it's not significant, it's one of our most common styles of housing in Grants Pass. And that's the cottage style of housing. Um, and so, you know, Grants Pass couldn't afford a big mansion for the caretaker that that shaped that park and made it beautiful over all the years, but it is in many parks and national parks throughout the and state parks in Oregon and other states. The caretaker's cottage is landscaped nicely and it's uh it's restored. And here we have a chance to not only do that but also to repurpose it and and bring income to the city that could be uh go back into parks and public safety. So I would like to see if possibly if you if the council would be uh interested in remanding it back to HBSC for further discussion.

Thank you. Any questions? Oh, by the way, Rick, I I think your question earlier was what was the number that Okay. And that number uh to do the exterior renovations on the foundation, the roof, etc. Uh, as I recall was right around 235,000. Okay. Anything else? Further discussion? Thanks, Ward. You guys got any questions? Okay, Eric. Ward, thank you for the uh for the discussion there. What would um can you can you go over exactly what it would what would be considered if it would if the decision was remanded out back to the um to to the committee?

What would be the what what what would you be discussing? What specifically would be uh

any uh any concerns that were raised in the survey? uh for for sure. And then uh just potential options that um might be more appealing to the neighborhood and to the residents of the city and to the council and to everyone. And I just think that there's I think basically it's a good proposal and uh but I think that there could be some tweaks maybe maybe yours you know maybe there's another structure like historically it's important to note that there was overnight lodging in Riverside Park late 20s30s into the early 40s there were little cabins and it was called a a motor court. It was very popular because the park was a beautiful setting and so people would stay in those cabins. So there has been overnight lodging historically and I think that's significant as well. But it's just those kind of things. Maybe maybe cabins that uh are similar to what they looked like back in in the 30s or whatever uh with a little more amenities than they probably had back then would be uh something that that could be a different look than a yurt. Um, so just things like that, but mainly the concerns and maybe some possible suggestions. None of that has been discussed at all. And I think this would be a good time to do that um with Mr. Woodard since he's the one putting up the money. Uh, and you know, is that a sensible um alternative or not?

Thank you. All right. Any you have a question for Ward or discussion? Question. Okay. Okay, Joel. Okay, thank you. Thanks, Word. Bernie, you don't need to get up yet. You may not want to. Yeah. So, I was just going to uh ask you um you you sent an email to Brad and uh the rest of the council probably hasn't read that and there there was an idea. Could you share that with us what what you said in that email? And that was presented to us here on the DAS. Yeah, that was like Friday, three days ago. Uh yeah. Yeah. The I think most of it was

I think what I did was went through the the uh surveys and did an assessment of all I put in one of these legal uh AI deals and it brought up everything and said, "Okay, this is how you should handle this, this, and this." And it came out. I think that most of the people in the community was, you know, if you look at all the surveys, they wanted to to save the cottage or the, you know, the caretaker's cottage. And so, and then there was, you know, then you look at all the money, you know, a lot of people, I can't remember the numbers, but it was over half, you know, that was interested in putting so much money into it. Some people said that it the money didn't even matter, just restore the cottage. Um, but I I come up with a number that was like $50,000. And to to answer I I can't remember it was one of you guys's question about the city city staff has a little bit more trouble uh coming up with fixes because there's so much more money involved with things when you have to do it through p public uh prevailing wages and things like that where private industry when they're a partner they can do it for a lot less money. So something that might cost $250,000 through all of that prevailing wage stuff and we do that all the time like for the city of Eugene and you know those those costs go way up because of all the different things that you have to do but private industry doesn't have to. So, you know, I think that cost in that email I sent was like, well, maybe we keep the cost down to like $50,000 that would be part of the city's input and then go after potentially grants together for for additional funds, but that we cap it at 50,000 and then that we also try something like, okay, let's try this for two years and or whatever the amount of

time would be of putting some yurts out there, you know, because they're they're they're not permanent that we could remove them if there was a lot of public backlash and it didn't work. But I think that was basically the gist of that email was, you know, these different variations that we could create. And like uh or just brought up, you know, maybe not yurts, but we go to something like, you know, a little cottages that look like the caretaker cottage, you know, for people to stay in. You know, that there could be those kind of we could create some variations here to see how we could You're never going to make everybody happy. We all know that. Um, but that we can make as many people as happy as possible and not use much of the city's money for the repairs. Um, that's the things I think I was looking at. Joel,

I don't know. Is that Does that answer Okay. Thank you, sir. Bernie, a quick quick question. How how big is the uh that yurt area? Is that like a quarter of an acre or what? How the area that you'd be dealing with? How big is it? How big is the area of what that you'd be dealing with? the Y the Y park. It varies because of the sidewalk, but it's 60 feet by about 100 6,000 square feet. And I think that's what Bradley said. 6,000 square ft of area that the closer to an eighth of an acre or something like that. Yeah. What is that? A 7th of an acre, something like that. A quarter quarter be 11,000. A quarter be 11,000. But

and Riverside Park is I think 30 some acres. I of It's not that big a spot. And it's right nestled against the caretaker cottage. But yeah, that's the Okay, thank you. Did you have questions or we're in discussion, so are you ready to go discussion? Okay, so got Victoria for further discussion and then Indra online. Victoria.

Um, Bradley, you were talking about George Kramer and a grant for rehabilitation of the building, but I missed um it was was that the same grant that you were talking about, the $15,000 grant, or is there money available elsewhere that is larger than that? Yeah, it it is a different pot of money. the 15,000 that we got is the state shipo um or the architecture, right? But what George Kramer was referring to are combination maybe of some private foundations um as well as maybe some other uh state or federal money. But that would be different than the

and you it seemed like when you were giving the previous presentation that it seemed clear that this would be the type of project that would be eligible for that kind of rehabilitation. Yeah, there certainly are a lot of examples um you know both Yeah. where you've gotten some Yeah. financial assistance. I think his the number he threw out I think was a $100,000 that he thought was kind of a target for this size project for for a for a grant. So,

okay. And can you give me somewhat of a of an example of why they would do that just to preserve the building, not for any particular commercial use or anything like that? Well, these would be foundations or agencies that have a very specific historic preservation focus, right? Um, yeah. So, that I mean that would be the reason would be to

So, in that I remember when we were talking about this a while back, it was like um one of the ideas was I think it may have been Joel that said like a museum or something like that. Uh, so if there were to be a grant that for this cottage for that, that might be an example of what and it would serve all of the public probably. Is that a good guess? Yeah. No, I think it's a it's it's a it's a good example.

Okay. Thank you. Um, and then just as a as a comment, I just wanted to because we're kind of going around talking about different things about, you know, the survey and it was this or that. But once again, this survey is exceedingly clear about the topic that's right in front of us. And um, the public is absolutely clear on whether or not they want overnight camping there. And the public has said that no they do not. All right. Further discussion. I got Indra and then Rob. Indra.

Okay. So when we did the there was a walkth through I heard of the caretaker cottage. Was that was that walk through um talking about the potential with the yurts and what that would be or was it simply a walkthrough for to see the historical cottage? Uh it was a ladder. Yeah. No, there was no yurt proposal at that time. Okay. And did the survey show photos or anything explanation of what the c quote camping would look like?

No.

Okay. So, I I'm kind of thinking that the public, yes, don't want overnight camping, but I'm kind of thinking that people maybe don't even really know what the proposal is to some extent. And so I'm wondering if there's a potential to have like a town hall at the site where people can come um and Bernie could be there and just like visually see what would happen um and talk about the proposal, not just the preservation of the cottage so people could see. I'm wondering if that would be a good idea uh before we decide on anything and then we can get input at the town hall as you often do um input on on whether you know people like the yurts or cabins or you know the historical people could be there as well commission um and it could kind of come together to educate the public on what this specific idea would look like that's just my suggestion

further discussion. I got uh Rob and then Joel and then Victoria and Eric. So Rob, so I'm trying to just I just want to be clear. I I think I kind of know where I'm leaning on this, but to be clear. So Brad, when when Victoria asked you about the um you know, could potentially one of these grants be used to u remodel or retrofit the um caretaker's cottage as a coffee shop or whatever? And you know, you answered yes, of course. Right. Right. So, but the the but a grant would never ever cover operating expenses. Correct. It wouldn't be covering operating expenses at a coffee shop. It would be just the conversion. So, Right. Right. Okay. So yeah,

basically Bernie's proposal is completely different because he's he's handling operating expenses, right? Right. No, of the ones that we looked at, those are very capital focused, very just Yeah. focused on the capital project itself.

Right. Thank you. And you know also to one other point and then um you know when we say that the survey was very clear um you know the last survey uh support overnight accommodations in Riverside Park. No 128 yes 41. Um did people envision tents or whatever throughout the park or was it specific? Did they actually envision one specific project in less than a quarter of an acre of the 32-hour 32 acre park? You know, that's not at all clear. They answered, but the way this is written, it would it would appear as if there could be tents anywhere in the park as opposed to one specific less than quarter of an acre in 32 acres. So, so while it might appear on on face value that the survey was really clear, um this the question wasn't very specific quite frankly.

Further discussion I got Joel Victoria and Eric. Joel. Well, I've done a lot of public um uh interactions and um uh it's very important that uh they are heard and so what Victoria says is very important um and given oh I also look at 90% of the people didn't care enough to even respond and and if you put the uh people that didn't care instead of in the anti in the pro it would skew the statistics. the other way. Um, but what I think we need to do is not move ahead at this point in time. Um, but put it back to the historic commission and look at the alternatives. Uh, we got we got the uh we got to um make sure we thoroughly understand the the public input and we got to make sure that the public understands what the proposal is because I'm sure some don't and I'm sure some do. And the other thing is we got this um I'm not sure this is the right word, but a hangover from the the uh um unsheltered living in the park and it it drives people's fears and um it kind of shuts off the upper cerebrum and uh um becomes a battle of life, life and death. And I'm certainly not going to die. And so um so I think at this point in time um given the public uh feedback and um uh given we got a a um a good uh uh resource for us to do the staff work and that's the commission um and we got we got some good good p uh private sector things. Uh I think we've come a long ways. Um and I don't want to

um spill the beans by moving too fast at the last in the last quarter. So, that's that's where I would be is I would refer it back to the historic commission for options and alternatives and um encourage uh Bernie to stay involved if you'd like and and see what see what would happen and um and uh make sure we're legal so that uh we u excuse me do what's right. Okay. So you guys have some action on the table to uh recommendation to remand this to the HBSC committee. Further discussion I got Victoria, Eric, and Rob. Victoria.

Well, did you did you make the motion then? Was that Oh, I'm wanting to hear your

Oh, okay. Oh, okay. Um, yeah. I don't think that it's it's a necessarily a bad idea to take it back to the HBSC for another recommendation. However, I think that uh added to that that directing staff to identify uh the funds um because if there is a significant amount of money under for historical preservation for a building that would just leave it and and just a little bit of a correction, I did not mention a coffee shop. I what I specifically said was a museum. I don't know if that's what the HSBC would like or um the council would like, but that is what I said was a museum. So, if the building could be preserved um historical building could be preserved and it was not paid for at all by the city, I think that's a really really good option. And if it were, it's just my opinion, if it were turned into some kind of a museum or something where the public could go in and see part of the historic aspect of Riverside Park, then that would open it up to um a lot more of the public and the building would be preserved. So, um, if you were going to make a motion to to reprimand the topic back to the, uh, HSBC, I think I would add a friendly amendment to also direct staff to identify the funds for the historic preservation of the building through grants.

Thank you. Uh, Eric.

Yeah. So, I would agree with a lot of that. Um, but when I was talking about directing staff for number number four there for those suggestions, I wasn't talking about uh private sector uh I mean they they could be involved. What I was referring to was along the lines of what Victoria was talking about with those extra fund funds that are available. are any of those suggestions that are on the number four uh answers uh something worthwhile looking at to be able to get those funds as well? Um so that that was part of what I was talking about. Um and then as far as um you know I know Bernie's got his hands full with with uh Parker's Place Mint um and all that. May maybe maybe a different alternative would be worth going towards with having another RF RFP go put through and figure that out because I'm sure he's very busy. Um, but as far as the camping thing goes, I know that camping is a is a very is not a very good it's a sore subject with the city. Um, because a lot of people don't like it. Um, in our parks um, and they're they're uh they're as Joel was talking about, they're they've got a hangover on that. Uh, but as far as the survey goes, I I I remember something in the on that page that showed uh pictures as well on the city website. So, there were there were things there that identified what uh it would look like. It wasn't just people answering questions. They had the the website, the city website to go to and look at a lot of these different pictures. So, um I I don't know if

people were just blindly commenting on the answers like what Rob was talking about, but I think that uh you know, people people know what they're what they're answering and it's clear that they don't like it. So, that's that's what I have to say.

Uh final discussion, Rob. Yeah, I I would agree with Joel that uh I'm not ready today to um to support an ordinance that would uh allow camping I shouldn't say camping, overnight lodging in even a quarter of an acre um of of our 32 acre park. And again, that's not a question that the that's not even uh I guess a subject that the public was even given a chance to understand due to the wording of the the uh survey. But I'm not even willing to to move forward and allow camping for even in that quarter of an acre or overnight lodging. But um the fact that uh no matter what grant we get from we've been looking at grants for what three years now at least. I've never heard once about operating expenses. And um that's that's that would be the beauty of this particular proposal with Bernie is that he's covering the operating expenses in addition to which I remember from our last uh workshop on this. Uh most of the remodel he was going to cover the expenses for that as well. So we didn't need a huge grant from anywhere. We can go back and look for them. It'd be great to get them. But that wasn't what was uh being talked about. We were being taught, I think Bernie even today said maybe it would, you know, keep the expenses even below 50,000 even if that's uh a very very low figure. But I know that the overall um remodel uh he was looking at uh bearing the brunt of that and that's just to be clear. Um but I think that uh you know right now um is overnight lodging in um Riverside Park socially acceptable? Uh, I don't think it's a great time to be really acting in that in that uh moving forward with that because uh uh and I and I um I don't want to uh demean Bernie.

He's working really hard on what he's doing. I think that a lot of people might feel a lot uh a lot better about this possibility if this was six months or a year down the line because Bernie's not just building out the Parker's Place, he's also um responsible for running the security and and an aspect of running it. So, when we actually see that um he can pull that off successfully, and I'm pretty darn sure that he will, I think people might have a a better feeling about another project in our park. We've had some people that really said some uh I'll say um un completely uh unbased um and irrational things at the podium, saying things like, and we we all heard it and it's on tape, saying Bernie was a crook. He's going to take our 1.2 million. is going to go back to Roseberg. We even had sentiment on the council in that direction. So, there are still people that have questions because they haven't seen Parker's open yet and they haven't seen it being run yet. And um I I think that I personally would feel better because I think that the public might feel better once we saw uh a successful track record along those lines because it does overlap because we're dealing with some of the same homeless people that were in the park are going to be in Parkers. There is an overlap there. So, um I I I'm not ready to move forward today to um approve o overnight stays in a in a small portion of the park. Um I think that there's a lot of validity there validity there and um the the uh private public partnership that Joel was talking about would be perfect there. Um but um I'm not willing to go there today, which I guess would mean that I would be supporting uh remanding it back to HBSC to see if they could fine-tune this. For me really, I would like to see some time pass because I'd actually like to see Bernie succeed and have the public know that everything

is doing well at Parker's Place before we talk about going back to the place that gave a lot of us, and I'm not using the term um lightly, but it gave a lot of people live near the park PTSD for eight years that we've been dealing with this. So, that's that's what we're dealing with, a PTSD situation on our parks right now. And I I'd like to get past that before we then moved forward to do uh overnight stays in that park that caused us so much grief. But that's where I'm at. Okay. Thank you. Um further discussion. Okay. You guys have been going around with this for almost two hours.

So you guys need to get to the point. The staff is actually asking you for action. We do have action on the table. I'll get to use one second. I just really got to get this point across because at 1:45 we're going to hit our twohour mark and I personally have to leave because I have an obligation. So further discussion go ahead. Oh, I was going to make a motion. Go ahead. So I want Please do.

Um in light of the fact that I think Airbnb is saturated. there is so much airbnb out there and for all different kind of prices and only for a certain part of the population. So I think to incorporate um this uh proposal for more people I would be in favor of reissuing the RFI to solicit new private partnership proposals to preserve the cottage. I have a friendly amendment to that. Um, if you would add directing staff to identify uh the funds to repair the and conserve the cottage to that so we can do both of those things at the same time and um and then from there to after those two things are done to uh remand it back to the HSBC. So all there are three things to that. So, I guess I had two friendly amendments.

Okay, that'd be fine. Yeah, I think that it would be nice to know if the funds were available to repair it and uh yeah, I'd like the input of the HBSC as well, so we can add those. Can you restate your amendment with I mean, can you restate your motion with the friendly amendments, please?

Okay. So, I'd like to reissue the FREI process to solicit new private partnerships, uh, simultaneously direct staff to identify funds to repair and conserve the cottage, and also get more input from the HBSC. Okay. So, there's a motion on the table to reissue an RFIE in regards to the Reed's Cottage. Uh, additionally directing staff to identify funding sources and remanding this back at the same time to historical buildings and sites committee. Correct. Correct. And we have a second further discussion. Uh, Indra was online. Did you have any further discussion, Indra, or did were you able to hear the motion?

Yes. Uh, no further discussion.

Thank you very much. Further discussion on the table, Joel. I was thinking instead of reissuing it today, it might be a waste of time and it's one alternative that the historic commission could recommend. um but uh have them do the staff work for us and then have it come back to us and and not not choose an alternative at this point in time that that the city should proceed. Okay. So, you have a motion on the table to reissue the RF RFI uh remand to the historical bite um building and sites commission as well as direct staff to look for um funding with a second that is on the table right now. Further discussion. Rick,

I appreciate what Joel's saying. We've been the cottage has been out there for three years trying to find a solution and I think it'd be more prudent prudent to go to HBSC at this time and then if they make a recommendation of reissuing uh than to pursue that course. Thank you, Seth. Yeah, I would I would be in favor of that versus reissuing the RFI right now. Rob.

Yeah. To reissue the uh the request without uh before staff might have an idea of how much funding is available. I I think with if staff's able to come up with how much funding might be available that would that could potentially uh attract different um respondents to the survey. So, I think it should go to the um HPSC first and possibly with staff giving having more information as far as how much money could be available. At that point, we can issue a more specific uh request for a private uh private partnership. Okay. I appreciate everybody trying to weigh in and get their opinions in here. We have I'm going to reiterate one time. We have a motion on the table to reissue an RFI. at the same time remand this back to the historical sites and building commission building and sites commission sorry board and direct staff to look for additional funding. All three of those things in this motion are to happen all at the same time. Victoria,

thank Kathleen. Uh given what other counselors have said, would you like to possibly even further amend to uh do the first two things first? direct staff and then rep reprimand back to the HBSC and then that will trigger the motion as I understood it was to do all of three things at the same time.

Yeah, that's I'll amend it. I'll amend it to take off the reissuing of the RFI. Um we want to direct staff to identify the funds to repair and conserve and we want to uh bring it back to the HBSC. So I will remove the uh reissuing of the RFI Victoria. Okay.

So the original motion has been tabled. A new emotion has been placed on the table, which is to remand this to the historical B uh buildings and sites commission as well as direct staff to uh identify um funding that would be able to be in place for the restoration of this project. So, with that being, does anybody else have any other questions, discussion? All right, we're going to go into a vote. Kathleen, yes. Um, Rick, yes. Rob, yes. Seth, yes. Eric, yes.

Victoria, yes. And Joel, yes. Okay, so Oh, sorry. And Andra, how do you plead? Yes. Thank you, Andra. I apologize. I'll have to try to keep getting reminded that you're online. Okay. So, staff, do you have direction? Yes, we do. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Okay, next on the agenda is the L Plaz Plaza use regulations. Do you want to start or do you want me to

Did you want to do the back? No, that's fine. Either way, it doesn't really matter to me. I didn't pull it up. I just completely blocked it out of my brain. That's okay. I won't let you do that. Sorry.

Good morning. So, we've talked about the Al Plaza quite a bit. This one is moving us to the next stage of this conversation and that's uh once it's done um what then um in terms of how do we actually operate and um what policies do we want to put in place for the use of the space. So that's really the focus of today's conversation. I'm going to just have a couple of slides uh with the background. Um having been here kind of from the beginning. Um and then Dana uh as our URA manager is going to step up and kind of handle the bulk of this which relates to the amenities and recommended uses per piece. So it does relate to the council goal of economic growth. Um, and really quickly on the background pieces, so this uh this plaza was included right from the beginning in the urban renewal plan uh back in 2016 2020. We we did have we hired terrain architecture which is Jim Love to really take the lead on preparing what what what is a concept to kind of hybrid you know to to create a hybrid space because I think we all that was pretty clear from the beginning. We wanted yes both parking and a place that could be used by the community. So uh train architecture did that. There was a lot of public in uh outreach and several different workshops over the course of a couple of years to kind of talk through those. Um engineering plans were finalized last year and um we did put it into your uh 5-year implementation strategy as well. Um the construction schedule is listed there. uh December of 25, Vitis Construction was uh selected to be the contractor on the project and then the notice to proceed in March. Estimated completion time is uh at the end of next month, June 30. Um these are some of the amenities that

have been included. You've seen these a few times, so um I won't go into much detail, but uh the the scope that we're talking about today, there's and you'll see from Dana, there's really two different tiers that we're talking about. Um let me pull this other uh so so the plaza is here um with the alleyway being on the north side of course and then fifth and H uh below. The whole scope of this project is both the intersection at G and Fifth and the intersection at H and Fifth as well as uh uh the the reconstruction of the s both sides of Fifth Street. Um so you'll see u options to consider for leasing and using just the plaza itself um without closing down Fifth. But there's another option where Fifth could be closed down. We, as you may recall, we have ballards, sleeves for ballards that are being constructed right now that are being put into fifth right at the intersection of of H as well as up at G. So those ballards would essentially serve as the closure. Um, so that would you would not be seen. Traditionally, you know, we've brought in the K rails and uh kind of put those concrete K rails up which are uh very ugly, frankly. Um, so this these will be really attractive. Uh, there's there's going to be ballards, permanent ballards in place along the plaza on on Fifth, but uh we have in the ride ofway both in the alley and um as I mentioned both at the intersections to put those in place so that that closure mechanism is kind of built into the project. Um, and here's the here's the two tiers.

allot only um would be one of those conversations. And then tier 2 is looking at the closure of fifth at G, the closure of fifth at H. Um as well as the alleys. Um so you would not be getting so that entire space would essentially become a you know a a venue um that could be used not unlike what you see during the Christmas tree lighting. um when we have the Christmas tree here and we close down G here and we close down H um so or fifth at H. So that those are kind of the the two levels that uh staff has kind of thought of that could be uh could be brought forward. So I think with that um you want to come back up and take it from there Dana

Brad I have a question for you. Yeah. I mean, Dana might be able to answer it also, but so you just mentioned two tiers, but there are already three tiers because like for instance, art along the road would be closing down um the parking lot and fifth and H because it goes into eight. In other words, H is not open during So there's at least three tiers that I can think of right now. You're talking two.

No, it's a good point. I mean, I think um No, it's a good point. Our our thought on that was that you you would really in terms of of the application that somebody would submit to the city for a special event if they're wanting to use the AL lot plaza. Um these would kind of be the two options that are spelled out very clearly in the application form that they would be able to choose from. It doesn't preclude somebody from saying, "Yeah, well, we we also want to do another part of this event. We want to close down H." Uh, that to my knowledge really is a very unusual event. Um, and wouldn't be advertised in air quotes in the application. Uh, this is, yeah, this is an option for you to use the plaza. I think are you know in part because of the impacts that you're talking about are quite different um between those options. So uh but you know certainly council can have that as part of your conversation but that that was our thinking.

Yeah. Thanks Brad.

Thank you. And I um I would also agree with Brad on that. I we would view Art Along the Rogue as a separate type of event um that requires the special events permit. Um these are just a few examples and of course Art Along the Rogue is on there of events that could happen in the Owl Plaza. What we're really trying to look at is that footprint though the plaza has been designed to close down the street there between um on Fifth, you know, between H andG. So that's why we're looking at that as one of the footprints. But it it also does make sense that you could just shut down the parking area as part of the plaza. So, let's just keep looking at this. Um, as far as policy development, that's what we're really working on here. We're trying to determine what are the rules around this plaza and how are we going to um share those with the public and how can they use it. We did look at um several different cities um and evaluate their policies on this type of space. Um some of the key factors that came out of that research um was was just to protect the public assets and investment. That's what a lot of the policy is focused on. You know, making sure that the heartscaping, landscaping, and pavers are protected. And then also safe management of pedestrian flows. So, of course, if there's people walking around, we want to make sure they're safe. The purpose of our particular plaza is really a hybrid of off- streetet parking and an outdoor gathering space right there in the heart of downtown that will support the community and economic vitality. So when we were looking at this, we were trying to determine do we come up with a whole bunch of our own rules or do we look at something that already exists? And we do right now have a special events policy um as part of our of the municipal code. So we started there. Um a lot of the questions and concerns that people have are addressed in the special events

policy. So we thought it uh pertinent to use that as our basis for um guidelines. Just a few this is basically an overview of what's in the special events application process. They must um provide an application no less than 30 days prior to the event. Um that application informs all departments so all departments are aware of what's happening and when the event is happening and and also um the details of that event. Um the applicant needs to provide evidence that they have sufficient insurance. If there's alcoholic beverages going to be available, they um must obtain the required permits. we can require notification uh to the adjoining property and business owners under um this rule and um they almost also an applicant must demonstrate that they have adequate security, first aid, sanitation and waste disposal facilities. That's always a concern, making sure they clean up after themselves. And um in that the current um policy under special events permit, they right of way must be cleaned and returned to the pre-event condition within 24 hours. We're recommending and looking at some maybe some supplemental restrictions that would be in addition to what has been laid out in the special events policy. um establishing and requiring a set fee makes sense to protect that space that's newly built or will be finished and newly built with nice pavers and shade sails and all those things. Um also considering standards for um surface protection, so not allowing people to to use stakes to secure down their pop-up tents and those sorts of things. Um grease mats for cooking or or serving areas. So if someone is serving food in the area,

it's protecting the the pavers. And then also um only non-residue adhesives. So when you're taping down cords for safety, different things like that, we want to make sure that the tape is easily removed. These are all standards that other cities also have. I'm going to point out that's kind of why they've landed in in our proposal here. Um, also, uh, operating regulations, making sure that there is emergency vehicle access, um, sound limits, you know, amplified sound from 8 or 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. That's in our current code. We'll just stick with that. And then waste management. Again, um, make sure that all event trash is hauled by the the person that's creating it. So adding a new and improved public space uh that's available for the community to use and reserve is an increase in our existing municipal level of service. So any increases in um level of service, they're required um to go before council for review and approval. So the council may choose to limit or expand a new service in accordance with the associated expenses and revenues taking budget impacts into consideration. So, we're going to go ahead and look at some potential expenses and costs associated with the use of this space. First, we'll look, we did look at the maps of the um tier one and tier 2. So, tier one is again the parking lot itself. Um, you know, there is going to be a process for reviewing a special events application. um 72 hours on-site posting so that to notice everyone that the lot will be closed and then postevent cleanup and maintenance. Um al also considering an management of a deposit of sorts. We would recommend a deposit. We'll look at

those costs here in a minute. Um but um a a security deposit that would be refundable. That way if there are damages we can um get a return on that. Um the tier 2 impacts would include tier one, but also um maybe extend the noticing period to two weeks. Also um because there will be the street closure, the alley at the alley and fifth street. Um using those ballers, the installation of those and putting them in and taking them out, closing the street is an additional impact on on the city. So um as far as considering a fee schedule, there's a lot to consider. um just ongoing impacts to various departments. Right now we're um working with the departments to get that feedback, but um you know administration, streets, downtown and parks as well as police and fire will have some impacts from um the use of this space or the closure of the space or even depending on the size of the event when it comes to to people being down there. Um we're also looking and recommending fees for kind of a variety of things to make it accessible. also a half day and a full day rate potentially. Again, the two different tiers, a smaller footprint versus a larger footprint. Um, the refundable security deposit there. There could be some time involved with staff too for a pre-event walk through on that. And then electricity, that's a new amenity that's being offered at the Owl Plaza. Um, so considering maybe an electrical fee um of a flat fee for that. Here's a table that kind of tries to give you a breakdown. It's a little bit challenging because there is so are so many variables, but um just looking at um our current Grants Pass Park facilities and some of those rates as well as the other cities that we looked at, we um are recommending some fees

that are within that range and and are what we would see to be comparable to um the fees that we saw across the board here. So, um, we've listed out for tier one. So, that's just the closure of the parking lot of for a half day, let's just say 4 hours, $160. We have other um there's only one other park facility that does a a 4hour rate and it was at 160. You could see other cities do an hourly rate. I think there could be some challenges with hourly rate because of the parking element. Getting people to leave the parking lot or or um so that it's available is going to I think could be a challenge. So I think having a larger block of time is going to be a better uh way to go. And then um we can look at tier one again the parking spot the parking lot as a full day. Um we're looking at a similar parks facility. the size was about $200 a day, which is right in the range of what other cities are charging for the tier 2. So, the larger footprint, they we couldn't find another example that was a half date rate for those. So, we just I guess showed an example of a doubled rate for the um the size from the half day rate that we showed for tier one. And then for tier 2 um full day uh the 350 per day is really an average of what we saw in the range of the other cities. Something that was a comparable size space for GP parks facilities was of $500 a day. Um refundable deposit right on the low range of what others are charging. And then a flat rate for electricity is right there again at the low range of that. We did just a very rough estimate of staff time on what we thought it would take to close the street with the Ballards and um be there to do a pre-event walk through, assess damages,

all of those things. And we're we're estimating around $230 between the the staff time for that. Um you've also received some community feedback from on the Owl Plaza. I know um there were some letters I think written from the H Street restaurants. Um Main Street provided a letter and then chamber also provided some feedback. Some that we of the um highlights I guess from 8 Street they felt um restricting food vendors and the total number of events permitted was valuable to them and that um they would request a three weeks notice um because of the impact of their um restaurants there. um Main Street and Chamber, they had some similar feedback. Chamber really actually had a slightly different take though on um the on restrictions. They didn't they wanted to I'm just looking at at it here really quick. Um just to not overregulate the space, leave it more accessible. Um have events more frequently. Uh allow for weekend events, allow for first Fridays, that kind of thing. Um, I believe these were all emailed to you directly, so hopefully you had a chance to take a peek at those. And as far as cost implications, you know, the final cost is going to vary significantly and and will be determined after we could get some direction from council on um your desired level of service for this space. Uh the um expenses are really going to be an assessment of the department impacts and um the revenue source if if it's decided to rent the space would be future rental and application fees. Those revenues we would recommend go back to the downtown services budget for ongoing maintenance of the space.

And that just leads me to the policy questions here. Um, I'll leave it to you to um, I guess ask me questions, but the questions that we're putting to the council are um, do you wish to set limits on the number of events that might occur in the Owl Plaza within the year? Um, given the anticipated impacts that we've looked at today, staff's recommending a maximum of six of the tier one of events, so the closure of the parking lot. Does the council wish to limit the number of events that will cause a street closure? Again, the anticipated impacts, the staff would recommend a maximum of four a bunch that would shut down the the larger footprint tier 2. And then this is there's some more larger questions here, too. Um, does the um council support a full cost recovery for extraordinary expenses that accommodate the increased level of service? So that includes all staff time, materials, long-term maintenance, or does the council desire to subsidize the use of the plaza in order to reduce fees to private users? So, a lot of questions. I'm available to answer some.

Thank you. Uh, questions for council. Rick,

thank you, Dana. Um, could you go back to slide 14? So when we look at impacts, I think a balance of the existing brick and mortar business, it's important to make sure that they're included in the overall picture and what impact it would have upon them and to address how I want to say we would soften the impact, but they would share in the activity that's there. And I'm not saying how we're going to do that, but I think that should be looked at so that we're not sacrificing one for the other, but they can both enjoy that. And I didn't know if you've explored that at all.

Um, we saw that feedback from 8 Street Restaurants. Um, I think it's I don't have a a perfect answer for that yet. I think it's something we could explore. I think there is a challenge with it being a um a public space that we would favor any any individual. Um but I think we can we should be working with the folks that are most impacted to try and mitigate any issues that might cause their business. Thank you,

Kathleen. Um Dana, I'd like to know um how how much does staff anticipate uh for events closing off all the streets per year is for I mean we have the chalkfest, we have the street lighting which doesn't need a street closed off. I mean what others are you anticipating and would it be four? Would there be a Well, we could name You've named two of them right now. Yes. the Arlong the Rogue and the tree lighting. Uh we know Cruz the Rogue has an intention to close that footprint um for tier the tier 2 footprint. Um so that's three. That would really only leave one other event open for the public to bring forward at this point.

Further questions? Joel? Victoria, have you had interest yet in any um have people contacted to say, "Oh, when that's open, I want to do this." And if so, what are some of those things? I would say yes. Um but they I don't have a lot of details on that aside from the the cruise, the rogue. I've had two additional people reach out and say, "When is the plaza opening? I want to know the process." But um I I basically told them, "We're talking about it Monday. We'll I'll give you more information later, but um I that those folks didn't um tell me exactly what they wanted to use it for, but they did have an interest in it. Eric, you got any questions? No. Seth?

No. Rob? Yeah, I've got a few things and I'm going to uh a comment to u respond to what Rick's concerns were. But um on slide 11 when it says um must submit uh an application no less than 30 days before the schedule event. Um what would uh staff turnaround be on uh reviewing an application?

Um that's a good question. Right now they're reviewed in in admin. Um I don't know if that's in the policy specifically. I can look that up and see if it's actually written in there. So the reason I the reason I ask regardless of what the answer is there's um you know the uh H Street Group and others actually have said that uh a bare minimum of 3 weeks notice is is needed for scheduling employees and frankly 3 weeks is not enough because people do sometimes schedule vacations and such far in advance. So when you say a minimum of 30 days, I could imagine that staff taking depending on when that application came in, if it came in on a Thursday before a 3-day weekend, I could see staff taking, you know, uh the better part of 10 days reviewing something. So then that leaves you with, you know, like a week and a half's notice. So that that doesn't work. So, the um the 3-w week um or rather the 30-day minimum uh submission time is not practical because I just don't see staff acting on it that quickly, especially if it was a slightly more complicated than average application or anything that needed discussion. So, you would hope that everything's black and white, but it isn't always. So, um that that part. So, slide 11 I think needs um no matter where we go in the rest of it needs to be adjusted. Um, also on the um on slide slide 16, I'm not sure why um a tier 2 full day um for for this uh location would be any different than uh why would it be less expensive than any other Grass Pass park facility? Because frankly, it's going to be more complicated than a park facility. Um, you know, one thing that comes to mind immediately is there's going to be times when vehicles will have to be towed. You know, there's going to be people in that parking lot. Sometimes people in that parking lot for days at a time because we have very very

poor parking enforcement. There there could be people in that lot that are out of town. Quite frankly, I know I know that for a fact, you know, because I know where they live. And so we're going to end up with uh again due the combination of poor parking enforcement and the fact that uh some people who actually live in the area um will keep their cars there for for days. There's going to be towing. There's going to be other issues. So I don't think that it should be any less expensive and obviously the person whose car gets towed generally has to pay. It's not the city. But I think it's going to be more complicated than a park shutdown. So I don't see why it should be any less expensive because the city's going to incur more costs. There's no doubt. Okay.

Um, and had you considered the the parking I mean the towing the towing aspect at all because it's going to be pretty straightforward. There's going to be times when people are just going to have to to get towed. Yeah, we've thought about that. Um, I I think we expect that over time people will start to understand how it's how it's functioning and hopefully people won't be parking there um overnight or you know like for longer periods of time. But that will definitely be a factor in the beginning.

Sure. Um, so, um, getting back to what Rick was saying about, um, uh, you know, one of the one of the main concerns I think that, um, the the H Street, um, food and beverage group was concerned with is that, um, they they and and I am part of they, um, you know, want to feel as though, um, rather than an afterthought, rather than an oops, we should do it differently next time, they respected going in and that um things progress somewhat slowly here before they're they're uh they're um as these concepts are proven. So, you know, I know that frankly as a um you know, a city staff person or maybe other people uh maybe other downtown groups, they might see a restaurant that has that's busy for an hour. They walk in, oh, that's great. Or even a line for half an hour, that's great. Big success. But, you know, that doesn't necessarily mean very much. If somebody has if they're if they're busy for an hour, they might they'll probably pay their their um employees for that day, they'll cover their payroll, but it doesn't cover anything for, you know, January, February, March when it's slow. So, my point is is just because it could appear as if the downtown these eight street businesses have a line. So, as a result, the knee-jerk reaction is, oh, we need we need food trucks. And that has been in the past that's been staff's reaction and other people who have run events there. Oh, we need food trucks because the restaurants will have a line. Well, you know, after, like I say, maybe the second hour, the second seating, uh, people will cover their expenses. The the the the restaurant owners might actually be able to pay themselves minimum wage through the slow months. It's only after there's been, we'll say, and this is true for any night on any restaurant, the third or fourth seating is what makes somebody uh really successful. and maybe they can uh

develop enough uh cash reserve to expand like Bohemian did or or move like Horny Goat did. But that doesn't happen just because there's a line for an hour and someone looks at that and says they got a line for an hour. We can bring food trucks in. It'll be a better event. That was probably the biggest single concern that the HG businesses had is who makes the decision and at what point is competition brought in? And I'd like to make the point because I I haven't heard it from really anybody, including the businesses on 8 Street. But the fact is is if if the restaurants and food and beverage on 8 Street fills up and there's a line and things are doing great for a couple of hours or more organically, that crowd is going to begin to filter over to G Street. And then we've got, you know, Perez is going to be helped and Lulu's is going to be helped and Bohemian is going to be helped and Laugh and Clam's going to be helped and the whole area, the other end of H Street gets helped. Takaria, etc., etc. But all that gets undermined if we bring food trucks in right away because a staff person thinks, "Oh my goodness, that place was busy for an hour. They had a line. We need food trucks." All the restaurant owners that I know of are completely against that concept of immediately bringing food trucks in as competition, which is what uh Rick's point was. And I heard from a staff person, too, at one of the discussions that they said, "Well, we didn't bring any food trucks in that directly competed with you." Well, guess what? People come to an event with one stomach. They don't come with multiple stomachs. they're going to they're going to potentially eat probably one main meal and they're not going to go to a lot of other um places. So, you know, if and I think I'm not sure if the example was a taco truck, but if a taco truck comes in and they sell 100 tacos, they have the biggest day of the year, that probably means that John Connor at the hall instead of selling 100 burgers that day, he's going to sell 70. Or instead

of selling 30 pizzas that day, he's going to sell 15. or or the ramen guy instead of selling 50 bowls of ramen, he's gonna sell 30. So the fact is that the food truck issue is really really important. And I and I think that if we had an event that again filled up eight street businesses and it spilled over to the surrounding neighborhood, that's really powerful. And I think that's why past council and this council was okay spending $1.7 million because it could help the whole area. So I, you know, to me, um, you know, food trucks are just completely, you know, it's a completely different animal. And just very quickly, um, you know, what differentiates a food truck from the brick and mortars? You know, I can guarantee you that my business is not unique to ha to half the businesses in town, but like just this year, okay, so I've donated to uh at least three local schools, individual athletes, marching bands, individual musicians, scholarships for seniors, Joseph County Food Bank, other targeted drives, and and for that matter, I know uh Clint will be happy to hear that I've also uh in the past um actually my question is is that has this been because it actually was written here but there was no response to the concept of outside vendors. You were asking they were asking us actually what we thought of outside vendors and that's the answer that I was giving. So outside vendor considerations are very important and you know that has to be worked out and I'm not sure if staff is even the right person to work that out but how how would you envision working that out? It's listed here, but there's no solution.

I think it's a a good question. Um, and I it is a policy question. It's whether or not we want to allow food trucks in this space. You you have the option to do that or not. You could it there and it's inherently limited to some extent by the power access that's available. Uh there's 150 amps available. Um that would be a maximum of three food trucks if that's something that some event wanted to do. You could also restrict um the use of um what do you use instead of power

generators? You could you you know so there's there you you get to decide that you can tell us that feedback and let us know what you think should be done. So to that point, if you're talking about the electrical supply there, then you're automatically assuming that the outside vendor would get the absolute prime location. Okay? And that also is against what the eight street businesses want. Now, the the food trucks, as you probably know, do have generators. Um, so there's a lot of things to consider. If you're going to say that they're going to use the power there, they're getting the absolute prime location that usurps everybody else getting first chance at the customers. So, I don't know if you've you've thought that through, but there's a lot there to consider. It's um

No, it's a lot to consider. I agree. And um it's something that you can decide ultimately.

Yeah. As I as I understand what we're doing here is that you guys are presenting us with a a starting of a model of a process to actually put special events in this area. it is incumbent on council to decide whether they want to go fullheartedly with what you presented so far, modify it, amend it, or add to it. So, um that's where we are at this moment in time. So, we are at a 2hour mark and I appreciate um I appreciate you guys having your banter and I don't want to pick on you, Rob, but you just spent 15 minutes basically saying that food trucks are bad. I think it could have been summed up a little bit quicker. At this moment, we're at a 2-hour mark. We have set a 2-hour mark for our workshop. So, we will need a motion to go forward and then I'm going to actually exit the building because I have a previous engagement and I'm going to hand the reigns over to the president of the council. So, Victoria,

so there were a lot of questions from business owners. Um, so I'm looking for a motion to go forward. I I'm getting to that, mayor. Um, there were a lot of questions on emails and people are very concerned about food trucks as well as other things. No, I'm looking for a motion to extend the workshop for two hours. I don't need banter about the topic. I'm either going to cut this workshop off right this second or you guys are going to give me a motion to go forward. Yes. I So, uh, move. Thank you. And I got a second from Rick. Thank you. All oppo. All opposed say nay. All in favor to go forward. Yay.

All right. Thank you very much. At this moment in time, I do apologize. I'm going to step out. I'm going to hand the reigns over to the president of the council and thank you very much and hopefully you guys will be a little bit more efficient here. Councelor Pel Andra has a question. No, I I wasn't finished with mine either. Okay, Victoria, what do you got going?

So, uh there was there are many concerns from business owners. Um, and I in looking through all of this, I was thinking about the and what staff has put forward here. Some really great concerns and but I just am not sure that we're ready to make um the policy right now until we know what it's going to look like. So, I was thinking that we might want and that's why I asked earlier, have people already asked? Um, one of the things that I thought was interesting that people came up with was if food trucks were going to be there ever. They need to be anchored to to an already existing business. I thought maybe that was an interesting idea, but I don't know. I mean, we would need to discuss it more and look into it. But my thinking was uh that we need to have some pilot programs before we even get to the policy. and and all of these policy questions are super important, but I think that the the area businesses especially kind of need to know what this is going to look like first and so do we. So, I wonder if we might propose to uh have some pilot programs with people who are already interested in doing it with some clear rules in place to begin with um uh before we finalize what the permanent rules for the owl lot are going to be. And uh so Dana, you said the first one who is interested was um

um Cruise the Rogue is probably going to be the very first event that would want to use the space.

Okay. And I don't know if they would be in I don't know if they want food trucks or not, but maybe uh Cruise the Rogue and then maybe one or two other people who I mean people are probably going to flood with interest in it. So, I don't know if council would be interested in pursuing some sort of a pilot program before we finalize all of the policies would be a good idea because and my idea in that those pilot programs should include something where the business owners, especially ones on Fifth and um I I know that there was one on at least one on H. There are more I know with input from maybe they should get first crack at it. I don't know um if they have an event um that they think would be great to bring people back to that area. Um, so that's just something that I wanted to rather than go ahead and and go through all of the aspects of of the policy right now, let's do a few things and then see how things go and then um and then come back and look at the policy.

Andrea, did you have something?

Uh, yes. I think we're building the general policy so we can go forward. We can't go forward even with a pilot without some sort of policy in place is my guess. But I had a question on so the um the notifying businesses uh two weeks and mailings I would propose uh mailing are so inefficient like it seems to me the city would want to have a direct contact either text or email with a contact from each business that's affected so it can be one coste effective and much more efficient in getting them uh alerting them to closures. Is that possible?

Yes, I think that Oh, go ahead, Brad. I uh Yeah, I mean, I don't know, maybe Karen has more to add. We Yeah, we I I think we could potentially Yeah. create that list. You know, we have You always have the challenge of those phone numbers changing and businesses changing owners and all that. But, um I I hear what you're saying, counselor. I mean, it makes good sense. Um the the typical uh notice in the past has been has been the mailing but in such a small area um yeah it it it's more timely and it's more efficient and we could we could put it I guess make it optional. I mean we don't rather require somebody to give us a a phone number. Um

right well those I mean almost all businesses and organizations you interact with these days are text or email. Text or email. So, I would think one of those two, especially if it's an alert from the city to closing uh the street or having an event would be good. So, that's a recommendation. Um secondly, I I um the the cost the fees. So, on that chart, it seems like we would want I I was just looking at a full day is hardly any more than a half day. And our full day is up at the the high end of other cities. I mean, our half day is at the high end, $40 an hour of other cities, but our full day is at the low end. Um, so I would propose increasing that full day um to it to maybe double what the half day is and then go from there. And then um thirdly, I would say no food trucks. There is a big concern and I agree with all that that Rob said and and Victoria mentioned the letters as well. Um, I think starting out we don't do food trucks because the goal is to increase uh business economic growth downtown and and food trucks have very very little overhead. And so why would any business want to come into downtown and pay a fee to have a brickandmortar building if they could just, you know, line up their food trucks for events and make money. So, I think it's a real detriment to to businesses and growth downtown. Now, it might if there are events and no food trucks and we need more eating places,

that might entice a a new restaurant to come downtown. So, I look at it as more of an incentive uh to bring business downtown if we don't have food trucks. So, those are just my thoughts. I think everything else, you know, looks good. Thank you, Joel. Um, just real quick, Dana, do food trucks buy a city business license? Yeah. Yes. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. I I'd like to, you know, add a comment, too. We've got at least three restaurants downtown right now that were restaurants that are that are empty. So, you know, do we want to promote uh more empty businesses or do we want to promote u you know, food trucks making a great living on a few events? I I I'm not a a big um a big fan of the food trucks for a lot of reasons. I mean, if uh um you know, one of the business owners on 8th Street, you know, suggested like on, for instance, art along the road when you have uh all of 8 Street closed from 4th to uh 6th, you know, if a food truck has prime location there near the uh intersection of Fifth and H, they're closer and easier to get to than any of the businesses on G Street. So there's going to be again less less organic spillover to the businesses on on G Street, which is really what I think we should all be wanting is for all of our businesses to be absolutely jamming. And as far as um you know, uh a pilot program um in some ways, you know, we have years of experience with Art Along the Rogue as a pilot program for the largest events. We've seen that for years. Um, as far as for the smallest ones, um, the businesses on H Street want were pretty pretty adamant that they wanted things to basically be done carefully. And in year two or three or four, we could be adding more food trucks or adding things once it's clear that that these events are not taking away anything from um you know the the G&H businesses because not all events are good for all businesses. There is no doubt that not all events are good for all businesses. Um for instance, last year finally the city did a great job on the Christmas tree breakdown. You know, in years past, we had a great event, the Christmas tree lighting, and then it was sometimes two

weeks before the tree came down and and driving and parking was back to normal. That's just completely unacceptable. You know, the turnaround is really critical and that in a sense, we'd like to see that happen really quickly a bunch of times. But food trucks are not at all popular with the downtown uh restaurants at all. If there were going to be food trucks, to me, they should not be getting prime location right in the middle of an event where it really really is um going to for sure take away business from the the local brick and mortars. And again, the local brick and mortars are paying our taxes, they're paying our safety levy, they're paying our safety fee 12 months out of the year. And and that includes when it's slow. So, they need to be really respected. And so, you know, when you when I saw that, you know, you'd made accommodations for having, you know, mats down for grease in case there's cooking, like, you know, the city is looking at a protecting their asset, but not necessarily looking at protecting, um, you know, the business owner's asset because if you're going to allow cooking in a place like that, um, well, then you're you're disrespecting the business owners. So, it's interesting that the details went one way, but not really fully thought out in the other direction. The city is not disrespecting brick and mortar companies. This was an option that's been put out there. It's common throughout the state of Oregon and the nation for this and it I'm just concerned about uh the staff being portrayed as being against brick and mortars with food trucks. I would say Aaron that it could be inadvertent and I will say that it could inadvertent and it may not be intentional but the fact is is that the policies that went in place before that were completely done by staff without input to the local businesses were in many cases anti- business downtown and I can name them if you want me to. So it wasn't intentional but the fact is the details you were looking at were more about from your perspective than from the outside perspective.

Well, I'm sorry, Kathleen. Thank you. So, Dina, uh I know we heard from several business owners that they didn't get quite I don't know if they didn't get notice ahead of time with the AL Plaza. Could you just tell me how much notice did they get before the project started? Just to clarify for the public

since we did get emails about that. Yeah, we sent out a mailing um actually be before in early December um before the the selection of the um the contractor to notify them of the contractor selection, the intent to proceed date and the anticipated start date and anticipated finish date too, I guess. So, I'm wondering if Indra's suggestion would be better to uh contact these people uh by email or text just to uh make sure that they cut it or with a response because the mail as we know is not always very efficient. If that might be something to consider.

Sounds like Brett has something. Well, I just wanted to add that we we we also did go doortodoor um and there was a there was a sheet that was handed door to door as well. God.

Okay. Andra, I just um I just wanted to respond to and I'll be with you in a moment. So, this gets back to uh what Brad just said and it gets back to all of these comments. Um, first off, the door-to-door sheet was basically after the fact, Brad, you know, it was it was a good month or two months after the initial attempt was where 70% of them came back undeliverable, whatever. But it gets back to I think the point that Andrew was making earlier and that Kathleen was just touching on and what Brad said, this is a very small area. And when we go back to when James was working here, it got to the point where James was actually going doortodoor and he actually was making contact with the business owners. I could see adding to the cost of this or at least for staff to include in consideration of the cost of someone going doortodoor as part of the notification process because it's such a small area. I mean, a staff person could do that in half a day. And you add that to the cost of the uh the event fee because when James was doing it, it was more effective than just relying on mail. And email would help for sure, but um to me that there's no there's no reason not to also have a door-to-door personal contact with that with any questions in real time rather than um that that to me should be included also. And uh Andre, what were you going to say? Yeah, I had a question on the 24-hour cleanup. So, is that 24 hours after at close of event? And does that include uh they would have 24 hours if they did popups or something on 8th Street that or fifth street would be closed for 24 more hours after. Where does that 24 hours take effect? Um that's a good question. It's what's

currently in the special events policy. So um it is saying that it must be and this is but special events are anywhere in the city um if someone applies to close down a street. So um that's what that policy says. We it we don't have to stick to that. We can have further restriction on Owl Plaza that says it has to be uh returned into to its condition within whatever period of time, but that's where the 24-hour comes from. It's in our current policy for special events.

Okay. I I would look to have that sooner because if an event's on Friday night and ends at, you know, 10 or 11, they have until all day Saturday to keep that parking lot closed, which is a heavy, you know, business day for businesses that might want cars parking. So, I think that needs to be tightened up quite a bit. um so that the downtown is put back with parking and streets for business the next day or or later that evening. My thoughts. Thank you. You know, I'll add to that also is I mean years ago uh during Art Along the Rogue um they closed down the intersection of uh ancient Fifth all day on Friday to put up staging for music. And I talked to the staging company and they said they could do it in four hours and they could have done it from 5:00 on. It didn't have to be closed during the day at all. It could have been done in the evening. Which gets back to also some of what the Chamber of Commerce was saying about fully respecting the we'll say 9 to5 business uh requirements for parking and driving and things like that. So they're saying that they were saying basically the same thing that Andrew is saying, which is the same thing that I'm saying is that we need to find a way to codify or word this so it's done in the absolute minimum amount of time, not the maximum amount of time. I mean, 12 I mean, 24 hours, sure, that's a piece of cake, but and for a neighborhood block party, it might not be a big deal, but as far as getting back to business, um, you know, if if if Art Along the Road ends at uh Sunday at at, you know, 4:00, they'd have until Monday at 4:00 to get all the parking back in back in shape. And that's just it's just way longer than it has to be. So, to me, this needs to be as tight as possible. The analogy that I gave uh to a um a debrief to Art Long Rogue last

year is it needs to be more like an indie pit stop than taking your car to a dealership and leaving it overnight to the snow tires changed. I mean, there has to be a priority that this needs to be as fast as possible. And you know, 24 hours is clearly not as fast as possible. If if uh 12 hours is is is doable in virtually every case, then it should be 12. But it's um yeah, I agree with Andrew. 24 is is way longer than it needs to be. Victoria,

so um I just want to go back to what I uh I'm not implicating staff or businesses or anyone with this. So, I want to preface that, but it because of the emails that we have gotten and uh just by the nature of Fifth Street, G Street, 8th Street being closed down, I think there's just some trepidation and there are a lot of downtown business owners who are just wondering what is this thing going to be like? And I think I think it's going to be great, you know, but I just don't know as though uh the downtown business owners, they I think they need time to acclimate to what this new space is going to be for them. And then they might um have some input then that would be really valuable to uh put into our application process and use restrictions for the AL Plaza. And so that's why I was suggesting that we do a few events where people were already they already want it and we already do have special event processes and then it would be okay if we uh in in the case of the Owl Plaza for these few pilot programs to say yes it can't be 24 hours, it has to be 12 or something like that. But, um, I think easing into it with a lot of downtown business, uh, input after watching it be used would be the better way to go because, um, then everybody's just going to feel just like shoo that feel a lot better about it. So, um, anyway, so just going back to the idea of maybe we want to do a few special events before we tack down all of the rules. uh and have those once again um if we can and if there's interest in

the businesses downtown to have those uh few pilot programs directed directly towards downtown business. Um so those were my thoughts. I just don't feel like I would know exactly although there were some great ideas that we've talked about. I don't know as though I would be ready to to vote on any of them because I think uh we have to see it in process first.

Okay. So um Okay. So to me and I um I think that there was some things that are pretty easy to um zero in as far as needing adjustment. One would be on slide 11 with regards to must submit no less than 30 days before since staff didn't even really know how long the turnaround was going to be. And again, my uh my point is if someone on a Thursday afternoon on a holiday weekend brings it in, you know, that's we've got to know that the businesses are going to get at least 30 days notice. Not that staff has 30 days or that the city, but but after it's been approved, um the businesses should have a month. So that that 30-day um to me if staff needs x amount of time, it should probably be 45 days and that would that would hopefully guarantee that businesses will get a month's notice that something's happening so they can schedule accordingly because a lot of restaurants need to schedule um they got to schedule heavy for some events and you can't just snap your fingers and get some of your best people in a couple of weeks. So for that reason that's that's the reason that we restaurants need more than 30 days. So again that that f first part on uh the second bullet or the first bullet needs to be no less than 30 days should probably be 45 days. The last bullet um I believe if we want to call it a pilot program I believe the pilot program should be 12 hours not 24 hours and see how that works. Um, as far as the food trucks go, um, uh, I'm not in favor of food trucks at all, and I'd like to see if the, uh, businesses feel that they can handle whatever the event gives them. And it may be that, uh, you know, we'll find out that businesses are doing okay with with or businesses doing really good, and we might find out that G Street businesses do really well, too, with no food trucks at events. But at least change to give staff a framework to move

forward because this thing is moving forward. Whether whether or not council acts on it, it's going to move forward. So those are two things, 45 days and 12 hours. And I would also um I would limit any uh any um food trucks and um popups to the businesses that are there in the in the immediate effective area. Um that that's those are three recommendations I would make to be able to move forward today. Joel,

to expedite things, I was going to make a motion. Um, and then under discussion, if there's any changes or amendments to the motion, I would be open to that. Anybody object to that? Okay. Seth was going to say something. Did you want to say something first, Seth? Uh, yeah. Are we in discussion or are we in We're in discussion. Okay. Deep into discussion. Well, I'd also have a question, Rob. if you think that this is a conflict of interest on your part uh since you do own a business that that's a great question. I I think I'm part of a much larger class of people. It's not my specific business. I mean, I just did a quick research and I mean and what you what did you come up with?

It's a Yeah, I mean it's an it pretty much an actual conflict of interest. potentially a potential conflict. But I'm just saying again I'm part of a much larger class of businesses that in basically covers the CBD which so I tell all the time. So I'm just making sure that okay the record's straight. That's all. Does uh does does Stephanie have an opinion on that? I think that's an ethical question that you have to assess for yourself uh whether or not there's an actual conflict of interest in whether you could benefit or your business could benefit from a decision that's made on this.

I don't think I would benefit any more than other people in a multiple block area which makes me part of a larger class. That's the way I look at it.

Yeah, Joel. So, I'm going to go ahead and make a motion, and if people want to make amendments, have at it. Um, I make a motion to uh accept the policy as presented with the following changes. um that we um uh the city requires a 45day notice and that they notify then the the uh land land owners and businesses in the local area by combination of text, email, um perhaps hard copy mail and doortodoor. That the full schedule tier 2 full day is in fees are $500 a day. The tier one is $350 a day. um that there would be at uh no food trucks uh and that after 6 months we review this as a pilot program and see if it's working or if we need to make changes. The the other change I would have as have a 12-hour cleanup and that we minimize the setup time where reasonable. That's my motion.

Victoria, do you I'm just asking about your motion. Did you say um we're going to review all of these things in 6 months? You said after implementation we'll review it in 6 months. That came from the pilot program idea.

Did you want to add that in that 6 months we're only going to have a specific number of programs or did you want to just let the floodgates open? I would um hesitate to let the uh restrictions on the amount of economic activity within those six months just because of a pilot program. Um and and if there's a need to uh review it sooner, I think we as a council could change that. There were uh Oh, but you're still are limiting the number of events, correct? Because that was a Yeah, there there was no proposal to change that.

Oh, okay. Yeah, Rick. So, Joel, if one of the downtown businesses that's a brick and mortar happened to have a food truck and they want to put it out there, then your motion would prohibit it. Um my understanding is if uh we have a a separate policy for sidewalk and restaurants um that they can do anytime um so for example the laughing clam has we we have sidewalk permits for those businesses. So they can do that at any time and that's independent of of a special event and that sidewalk could include their own food truck.

No, no, no counselor. We're just talking about sidewalk/cafe type of events that are uh permits that are just allowed outside of their place of business. Uh if you're wanting to have a discussion about brick and mortar and having they them with the the only exemption, then I'd also need to define what boundaries and areas of your brick and mortar area you'd be looking at that would allow that. So,

okay. Thank you. I think All right. Um, I may be talking too much, but I would argue against excessive regulation going in and seeing what the pilot program comes up with and then if we need to make adjustments from there, but not to go in with a whole lot of, uh, regulations. So just to clarify your motion uh was were you wanting to because you mentioned leaving it open to provide an opportunity for the market to drive how many events but we did have here listed some maximums for the year. So I just wanted to clarify did you want to remove those maximums or did you want to have those maximums for the pilot project for the 6 months? Um any any uh item that was my intent was we could change but uh my intent was any item that we the motion remains silent on would be as proposed.

Okay. Thank you. Indra has a question. Andra go ahead. Andra second on the motion. Sorry. Um, yeah, I I agree with that motion and I I agree with um all the points. And I guess my last question would be uh if we needed to review it sooner than six months, so if issues arose right away, I mean, we certainly could do that. Correct, Aaron?

Yes, that is correct. You can do that any time. And just for a a point of order, we we need a second on that motion before we continue to discuss. I'll second it.

Did someone else want to talk? Yeah. Okay.

Uh I mean, I'll just say this. I mean, I'd feel much more comfortable moving this to a further workshop where the mayor can um run the meeting, but I will say I don't agree with uh some of the things in that motion. Um I do not agree that we should disallow food trucks entirely. Uh I don't think that we should allow them at every single event and you know we can decide what that looks like. Um you know even if we only start with a few. Um I just think that um that would be yeah doing a disservice and I think too if we're going to do that we should hear from the public um public comment bring people in from the community. Um I know we have obviously heard from downtown business and restaurant owners but I think we should hear from um other people outside of that. Um, I don't necessarily agree with the cap on a maximum of six for tier one events and four for tier 2. Um, you know, it's a tricky, we'd have to discuss that more as well, but I think we should not cap it that low. I mean, for instance, you know, even if we wanted to use it for um first Fridays, I mean, I could see eight to nine first Fridays. You know, when the weather's nice, we have it on a Friday night. So, that automatically covers six of those hypothetically speaking right now. Um, you know, I understand if there's multi-day events that could also come into play. Uh, uh, let's see. Yeah, I'm okay with the 45day notice. I think that's fine. Um, but again, I I think there's a lot that we have to discuss here. I frankly don't feel comfortable discussing it with the current setup we have right now. Unfortunately, Clint had to leave. Um and yeah.

Um so Seth, on the one where um like um first Friday, uh how would you change that? Well, I mean and that's where I mean like so that I mean that would be a tier one event, correct? We wouldn't be shutting down the fifth street, right? How would you change the fee schedule on that? I'm not talking about I'm not talking about the fee schedule. I'm just talking about the the number of allowable I don't was that included in your motion? I don't know. Um I I included the uh price discussion for that was mentioned but but first Friday was not mentioned for multi multiple event uh multiple days events were were um not discussed until you brought it up.

Well, so how how would you change that? I'm I'm mostly talking about the staff recommending a maximum of six tier one events per year. I'm not talking about fees right now. Oh, so you're not talking about fees. You're talking about the number? Yeah, I'm just talking about the number of events per year.

So, um I'm just throwing I'm just brainstorming with you. Um first Friday, uh is it could we consider all of those one event? I I think from an applicant perspective you you I mean I it's different than what the concern was here brought up here was just looking at the impact uh where does council want to go do they want to limit events in general uh in the number per year and councelor Benham brings up a good point too uh you know if if we were to use just four of of the tier 2 we already have three of them basically covered in the first so

you it's really a policy decision and if you do a pilot project. It's up to you on if you want to do because it sounds like we're doing a pilot project for the first six months and do you want to limit in the first 6 months or do you want to have these the because in essence these numbers would be the first six months. So to um uh expedite discussion I would amend my motion um to say that um an event that's repeated within a certain time period is uh counted as one event under our policy. change it. I I'm just throwing it out there. We just need to need to get something that's reasonable. Yeah. I just want to clarify.

So, Seth, are you saying that uh people might want to host one-day events on a first Friday and that's why we would need more than six? First Friday in itself is not a it's a free event. It's just that everybody Well, yeah. But like for instance, if Main Street were to reserve it and you know whether somebody else comes in there's a reason why we need more. Yeah. But then I I understand you know if we have too many you know you don't want you know five backtoback days of the parking lot closed. So it's it's more nuanced than just saying all right add more. We have to think about it for sure. Well what's the number? Rick

you want to increase it to nine. I Rick go ahead. I don't know it's necessary to change the motion because we the council have the ability to bring this back to us if we've reached that limit and to extend it and modify it. We don't have to wait 6 months. It could be two months from now. It's before us again because we've maxed out. So, does that make the motion still valid? It'll work. Andra has a comment. Andra, go ahead.

Oh, yes. I was just going to say, I mean, we're just we're making suggestions. Staff is going to go back and rewrite write the policy and application process and then it's going to come to us at council before a vote where we will have a chance to have public input. Um, so I don't see that as a problem and and I hate to just prolong this to another workshop. I really think we can we can make a decision and move forward. So, it's it's done quickly this week. Thank you.

Just from a standpoint of recognizing where we are with the numbers and I think we're further discussion might be good and to get direction today would be great. Uh, if we take a look at the tier 2 events, which is the closure of both the the the parking lot and fifth and fifth street there for a six-month pilot project. If we did have it limited to four, we'd only have one event in essence that we don't know of that would be able to do that in 6 months. So, it is very limiting because we would have starting in June, we would have cruise the rogue that's interested. We'd have back to the uh we'd have um Art Along the Rogue and that's that's in October. We'd have Christmas in December. So that's three within a six-month period. And so that provides you with an opportunity of do you want to take a look at those restrictions, broaden them, remove them for the pilot project. Well, then we could change the wording to say um uh it's restricted to that u and any additional ones beyond that within the time frame will come before council for exceptions. Or if if you think that's too uh regulated, you can say uh at the discretion of staff. But that would be a threshold for monitoring and and making a decision.

Yeah. If we're going to go to council with these applications, I think we need to look out even for further than 45 days in order to meet the time frames associated with some of the meetings. Exactly. Sure. I agree with that.

Yeah, Victoria. So, I want to get this going as quickly as possible because I think the events will be great for business downtown, but I just also don't feel like we see the full picture yet. And that's why I so I really appreciated the the pilot program that you put in your motion. But um I'm also I don't feel like I'm prepared to vote on the no food truck just yet because we have heard from the public in both instances. Well, I guess three instances. There are people that want them. There are people that absolutely don't. And then there are people who want to limit it to people who already have anchor businesses in the area. So, I'm just not ready for that particular take that off the table right now. Um, so I don't think I would be ready to vote on this right now, but I also feel badly about that because I don't I want this to get going um as a pilot program. So, I don't know what other counselors think about that, but I just wanted to add that.

Seth. Yeah, Joel. I mean, I would like if you'd reconsider the complete ban on food trucks. Again, I don't think we should allow them for every single event. And we can put parameters on what that looks like, even if it's um, you know, a certain amount of, you know, maybe tier 2 events. Um, you know, we could offer spots to local vendors downtown first, um, as kind of a first ride or refusal. Um, I don't I just I just think for this if we're doing a six-month test period, you know, there's some some large events coming up and maybe that's it. Maybe it's based off of estimated size, I don't know. I mean, that's obviously um a little bit subjective, but uh again, I don't think we should ban them completely. I don't think we should say that anyone in any event can have them. Um so, yeah.

So, another uh option, Seth, is to say uh ban generators because electricity will only support two food trucks. What do you man generators? I think truly if you're trying to limit, you should limit the amount uh and not not the use of generators as the ban. Okay. Yeah. So, um in in light of that spirit, it would be limit food trucks to two per event. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, just throwing things out.

Indra has a comment. Did she say Andrew was on the phone? Indra, go ahead.

Yes. Um, back to the food trust. I mean, I I don't know. Like, you're getting into a whole complicated area because if you limit it to two, which two are you going to allow? Who's going to pick them? What kind of food are they going to be? I have a food truck. Does ice cream count? Like I could bring ice cream for sure. Ice cream would take away from buying um gelato at uh the House of Glory. You know, it would it does compete. And then my other um point on I if a brick and mortar has a food truck, I I also think that's gives a a little bit of a disadvantage to the brick and mortars that don't have one that some just happen to. So they're going to put theirs out there and they'll get more business for sure. Um so I I would and then Okay. So, I just that's why I think we start with none and then we can see we can add them as we go, but we need a clear policy on how we're going to do that and who's going to choose them and what they're going to be and does the the person doing the event choose them so they have uh their food truck so I could have event and have my own food truck, you know, it's just very complicated and that to me doesn't really help the downtown. um food and beverage industry. My uh and then maybe with the six-month pilot because um the events are a question, maybe we could have six events in six months. So like one event a month and try it that way. So it's not inundated with 12 events, but it's more than four. That's just an idea. Thank you. So, I'm not sure where where we stand on any any motions or adjustments or

amendments. Okay. Okay. So, um if my understanding of the uh Robert's rules of orders, I I need to see if I'm willing to amend my my original amendment. Yeah. The current amendment on the on the dis right now is some what's presented with the following changes. 45 days in advance notice, 12 hours of sit at 24 to return to prevent coordination, and I've got here no food trucks for 6 months, then reassess and full day at $500.

You know, at this point in time, and with all due respect to what Seth says, cuz he there's an element of truth in it, I would I would uh start the first six months with no food trucks and see how it works. and and we're going to need a policy that's going to be not overregulated, but a little more well thought out than just the spur of the moment at this time on food trucks. So, um I would not not change the the motion on food trucks at this point in time. I don't know if the second agrees with that.

Joel, I I would agree with that. Would you do a friendly amendment to increase up to six events the limit instead of I think it's at is it at four? Tier two. Tier two is at four right now, counselor. Yeah. Yeah, I would happily do it and increase it to six tier 2 events. Thank you. Okay. I support that. Thank you. So Seth, yeah. So Joel, what metrics are we using for the next 6 months if we're not if we're not going to have food trucks? I mean, in 6 months from now, what are we going to come back and say we learned with not having them? I'm just I'm just curious.

So, what I would anticipate is we go forth with this proposed policy, we um if there's there's going to be some unexpected bumps along the way and um it might be u uh the restaurants can't handle the food and we need some food trucks. It might be that uh some food trucks are offer a variety that people want. Um in which case we'd have a little more time to look at the policy and how we do it. Um in terms of the number of events, we'll see how many applications we get and see if we want to change it at that point in time. Um but I think um you know this adapt I call it adaptive management where you go forth with with at this point in time what what uh seems fairly reasonable. it doesn't answer all the questions and then as we move forward in six months we uh adapt or change as we see fit.

Victoria, so Cruz the Rogue is the one um event we know would like to do this. So were they does anybody know are they thinking about using a food truck? No. What? Cruz the Rogue. Were they wondering about using a food truck? Um I I can answer it, but we also have Mike here. Um they are not right now. They're looking to use the street to do a a large table event and they are going to use downtown restaurants for that.

Thank you. Any other comment before we take this to a vote? Do we have a second to Joel's motion? Yes. Ender was the second to Joel's motion. Okay. Joel, how do you vote? Yes. Victoria, yes. Eric, yes. Seth, no. I abstain. Uh Rick, yes. Yes. Kathleen and Indra. Yes. Okay. So, I think uh the motion passed. What? Six to one. Six to two. Six to one. Six to one. Thank you.

Huh? Okay. Okay. Okay. So, next item is uh procedures for conduct of business and Aaron is going to lead us get us started.

I have a very brief presentation as my understanding is we had two questions in front of council that you just wanted to provide additional clarification on and have a discussion. Um and that is really when it comes to public comment and the public comment cards and then how many minutes we provide for public comment. Currently, right now, the blue cards can be submitted up to the start of the city council meeting, which is six o'clock. People have the ability to call in, email, and uh do that in advance, and then also to show up by 6:00 and do so. Council showed a desire to have a discussion about the potential of changing that. And currently right now we have the opportunity for people to take up to two minutes to provide public comment with a 30 minute stop for the total public comment portion of your business meeting. That concludes my presentation. Open it up for any questions. Will you go back to this slide and Yeah. Thank you. Indra has a question.

Cath Kathleen's got a question first. Thank you. So, uh maybe this is a question for Karen. How complicated is it to receive those cards up until public comment time? Is that chaotic? Is that does that not run smoothly or uh would there be a reason to cut it off at six?

It depends. Um it depends on what what topic is what you know how many people are in the audience and then if we're limiting it to only 30 minutes then to determine how many you know are we going to adjust the amount of time they can speak. So um so sometimes it's crazy and sometimes it's not. So obviously it would the last ones might not get to comment because of the 30 minutes but that would be have to be known ahead of time that if you submit it late then you might not get so that's a way of or or we adjust the time from 3 minutes to 2 minutes or from 2 minutes to 1 minute that they could speak to get to make it into that 30 minute slot.

Yeah. T typically in the past that's the way we had always thought about it is that if if you know um if 30 people gave cards in then and they'd all get only get a minute. So to me the worst case that could happen is if a ton of cards come in right before public comment then she's counting or council president or the mayor's counting the number of cards and we have to readjust. So we might be delayed a minute or two while we count the cards and adjust the number of minutes. That's how I I look at it. That's that's a worst case situation. Um, right. I mean, that's right. Worst case is at the end you you'd count the cards and divide the minutes, right? Or I would or Clint would.

Um, and then the other thing is we do currently have a practice of people can email me by 3:00 on the day of the meeting to sign up for public comment and I'll just write a blue card out for them so they don't have to be here right at 6. Okay. Okay. Any other comments? comments, questions from anybody? Hendra. Hendra. So Karen, you just said you will take them up to 3, but in this it says to 5:00 p.m. So should that be three? Where

committed business hours? The very first sentence. Well, that that that's that that they can be submitted during normal business hours if they want to submit something in advance. Um, but yeah, if they want to come in and fill out a blue card, they can do it till 5, but if they submit it online, I like it by 3. That way, in case I miss my email, that way I can be sure I don't they don't email me later. Okay, so I'm trying to read this. So, this call to a to action gives people 3 minutes to speak and they can um submit cards up to public comment time. Is that right?

Well, counselor, the discussion is really twofold. One, I think we should break it down and and maybe solve one at a time potentially. Uh the question is, do you believe the public needs 3 minutes versus 2 minutes? And what would you like to have during your your your public comment time? Do you want to provide them with two minutes or three minutes? Then do you want to provide them the opportunity to provide blue comment cards up to public comment and or leave it the way it is before the meeting? And those are that's the two questions. So really, do you uh do you want to extend it to 3 minutes and then do you want to extend it to up to the meeting up to the uh public public comment during the meeting? So this potential change

we're not recommending we're not recommending any potential changes. This is for council discussion. Council has mentioned keeping it 2 minutes. Council's mentioned moving it to three minutes and council's also mentioned moving the public comment opportunity period. The staff has no recommendations on either one of these items. Okay. But in this public comment potential change, it says comment cards will be received up until the public comment section of the meeting and indeed that individuals will be given three minutes. So if we um propose to accept this potential change, it affects both of those things.

It all depends on your motion and how you frame the motion. Okay. Thank you. So, and Andrew, I was planning on asking two separate questions when we asked for the motion. Victoria, did you have your hand up? Victoria,

well, I don't want to stop anybody's uh discussion, but I think it's a good idea to extend public comment back to 3 minutes because the public wants that. So, I would like to propose to extend public comment to three minutes and to allow for blue cards to be turned in by email up until 3:00 p.m. on Friday. I think that's what Karen said. And uh or up until 5:00 p.m. if they come in in person. And um I would also leave it open to someone to suggest that we extend public comment time total uh to I don't know. I'm I'm not making this part of my motion, but I think it it it logically if you have more people talking, you might need more than 30 minutes, but I'm just making those two proposals right now.

Could you if you want to make a motion, could you divide it into two things and we can Yeah, that that was my motion. both things. Okay. Do we have a second? Rick second. Any any discussion, Kathleen? So, I was wondering if we need to modify um in case there are so many cards that we need to reduce the amount of minutes that people can speak. Would you be willing to make a friendly amendment to that?

That's that's currently how our process is right I don't think amendment would need to be required, but if we have the the current p practice and rule is 30 minutes for public comment, uh this public understands that and then we modify the chair or the mayor modifies based on the participation. Okay. As long as the public understands that that's what we're doing. I don't I haven't seen that happen yet that we needed to modify. Victoria,

well, I was actually thinking about it in the office. So, I was thinking about it from the public's point of view. If there is a topic where you have more than 10 people who want to speak for 3 minutes, then you're going to need more than 30 minutes of public comment. So, I didn't want to add that as part of the motion. So, it isn't, but there could be time when public comment needed to be extended. And I don't know if there are other counselors who wanted to add that to and I would accept it as a part of a friendly amendment if people wanted that. Kathleen, you're shaking your head. What does that mean? Yeah, I agree with that.

Okay, so you wanted to add a third piece as the friendly amendment. Okay. And the third piece is that public comment could go in infinitely long. It could be infinitely long. There's no limit. No. That the public would understand that the minutes would be reduced if there were that many cards. Well, that's the exact opposite of what I think I heard Victoria say. That's Yeah, I was saying it should be extended, but you didn't make the motion. You didn't make the motion. So, was there a second to that? Eric, you're seconding that question. Oh, question. So, Erin, you said that that was already policy. So, does it even need to be included in the motion?

Currently, right now, the hard line from the policy is you have a business meeting that's made for you to do business. During that business meeting, you provide an opportunity for public comment. You have a rule that states you will provide 30 minutes for public comment during your business meeting. And so if you have, you know, 3 minutes per person, then you have a general 10 person limit, uh, you know, 2 minutes, you have 15 people that can comment without modifying the known expectation. If you have 35, if you have 30 people, the rule is right now is you monitor and you you change by providing everyone one minute to provide public comment uh within that 30-inut period. A lot of times if you're going to have 50 people showing up, it's likely something bigger than just a public comment perspective and you may want to look at having some kind of public forum on the topic that they're there to discuss. Uh again, public comment is an opportunity for people to provide you with their input during one of your business meetings. And it's up to you to determine if if you believe they need 2 minutes or 3 minutes, but we have a a 30 minute block. And so that would not need to change. Uh if you have uh like I said, if you had more than than 10 people, the chair and or the mayor would just modify the time that those individuals would have. So, and thanks Aaron. And to be clear, right, I'm I'm I'm hoping that we all understand um for um a council action item, there would still be an unlimited amount of time. There could be a hund we've had we had we've had 100 people outside, but there would be an unlimited amount of time for council action item for people to be able to speak. So, that would not there, you know, their ability there would not be a bridged at all. We're just talking about the council act council the co the public comment part that has nothing to do with what's on the agenda that night. We're limiting we would be limiting that to 30 minutes and

um but on council action items it could go in unlimited unlimited amount of time if everyone understands that. Victoria, that's a really good point. And in that case, are we also when we do this, which I I kind of I thought it was maybe a part of it that all speaking would be extended to 3 minutes including on action items or no,

likely we tried to keep those uh consistent when it comes to the comments under council action. Uh we currently right now have two minutes along with the public comment. So this is an impact that you may have on your business meetings uh to stay consistent so we're not having two different rules is if you're expanding from two to minutes to three minutes for public comment we should probably follow same suit on council action which could be extending your meetings again. So, I think from a um a policy perspective, you need to determine at what amount of time do you think is acceptable for the public to provide their input on a topic that's coming in front of you or to provide a suggestion on a future topic that they'd like to see you handle. Rick.

So over the years when everybody when people do speak a lot of the comments are identical and they just have the opportunity to express themselves and I feel I would be supportive of two minutes only. Thank you. Okay. Any any other questions, comments? Um, are we hope Well, I I just want the the motion to be clear that we're extending the three minutes to action items as well. Okay, Eric,

I would also include that if uh you know, if they speak for three minutes and they have nothing to say, they usually yield that time anyway. So,

I've never seen it. Okay, we ready ready to vote on this? So, okay. So, what we've got is we be um all in one motion. We've got uh public comment cards for public comment, not action items. Public comment can come in right up until the public comment part of the meeting. Um it's going to be extended to uh three minutes. And um and is that regardless of how many there are? It could go more than the 30 minutes. Yeah, I guess it would have to be unless we want to extend on it to the at the same rules keeping it consistent that it's 30 minutes for action items as well. 3 minutes and 30

action items. We're treating we treat action items just like public hearings. Uh so so we probably couldn't do that. Technically, you you wouldn't want to do that. you want to provide like councelor Pel mentioned there could be a hot item under action that you want to hear from everybody. Uh so I would not try to put limits on those just like you don't on public hearings. Okay.

Uh but you can maintain or you can extend your section of your business meeting to how much time you wanted to get dedicate to public comment before you modify the amount of minutes that you've provided individuals. I mean to me I I would like to keep the public comment portion at 30 minutes. I wouldn't mind extending 3 minutes given to each person and if there's less than 10 I mean if there's more than 10 people for public comment then it gets reduced and Karen can do the math and set the timer and still that way public comment is still 30 minutes but um and anytime there's 10 or less people which is usual for public comment they would get three minutes there's more than 10 people for public comment uh which is pretty rare I don't um but they c council action items would and get 3 minutes and they would have essentially an unlimited duration to hear everybody that we want to hear. So we would make 3 minutes for public comment, three minutes for council action items with a maximum of 30 minutes for the public comment section of the of the meeting. And if that was a friendly amendment,

yeah, I'll take it as a friendly amendment. Okay. Okay. We need a second then on that. Second. Second from Kathleen. Andrea, did you have something to say? Yes, please. I do something to say. So, I'm good. I'm good with that part. And uh I I'm imagining that the mayor or council president, if they're running, can still can still vote have council vote to extend even though the maximum is 30, there could still be council vote to extend that at a meeting. Would is that true?

That is true. You have the ability to modify the the agenda and that would require a majority of council to move that change. Okay. So, that's still possible. What I what I I don't know if I'm objecting to or not because Victoria and your motion is to accept cards until 6. I'm in until meeting time. I'm in favor of accepting cards up until public comment time. So, I agree with the and it's it sounds like we she has it just to go to meeting time and I'm not in favor of that.

My my understanding is it was all the way to public comment, right, Victoria? It wasn't just meeting time. I Yeah, I think that was inherent. What I'm talking about, the 300 p.m. for email and the 5:00 p.m. is people who want to come in to give Karen a blue card because they aren't going to be here at the beginning of the meeting. That's how I was understanding it. And to make it easy on Karen, just you need to email her by 3 uh Friday or uh come in by 5 Friday if you aren't going to be here at the beginning of the meeting. Is that not not Friday? on Friday. No, it's on Wednesday meeting.

Excuse me. Wednesday. That's what I meant to say. Okay. And could your motion include up to up to public meeting time to get blue cards or do we need to do that separately? It did. It did. Right. Her her motion was to accept blue cards up till public comment period. Thank you. Thank you so much. Okay. Okay. Okay, I think we're ready.

I think we're ready ready to vote then. So, what we're voting on is three basic. Okay, we're going to extend public comment during public comment time and for council action items to three minutes. Uh the blue cards can come in the day of in person up until uh the uh that portion of the meeting. And um if there is more than 10 people during the public comment portion then the time will just will not exceed the 30 minutes uh the time will just go down for each person. So I think that's pretty clear. Is that clear Aaron? Yes. Counselor. Okay. So Victoria, yes. Eric, yes. Seth,

yes. Yes. Rick, yes. Kathleen, yes. Joel, yes. Indra. Yes. Okay. Unanimous. And that's what happens when Clint leaves early. He doesn't he doesn't get his input on that. All right. Cuz that's not what he wanted. Okay. Do we have any what what else do we have today? There is a agenda review still and then there is an executive session for property. Okay. Right. And there's two motions in front of you, uh, counselor.

Okay. So, for agenda review, do we have anything from for uh for Wednesday night? Anything that needs to be clarified, Eric, the uh elevator one, sorry, I don't have it in front of me here. Um, but there was only one there was only one uh bid for that and I wanted to see I know it's a a pretty specialized field, but I was wondering if we can get uh some more discussion on that as far as uh um what uh what that all entails and if uh if we can get like a an average cost nationwide so that we can see that the bid is a good bid uh for for for that I don't know if it's worth discussing or if uh that is if there's I mean I know it's a very special field. So

maybe if you can counselor maybe staff can address some of that today and we can come back with something more also. But

so I I actually can we actually held off on awarding this bid to the contractor. We did a notice of intent but then we sat down and negotiated with the contractor to make sure that the bid that they provided was um cost effective and that it was a good price. The work is, as you well know, very complicated. They have to replace the cylinder. The our elevator is not like there's no cables at the top and an elevator house. So, there's actually a hydraulic cylinder underneath that pushes it up and down. And so, they have to remove the elevator car, remove that cylinder, put in a new cylinder pit, for lack of a better word, and a new cylinder, and then recondition it. and then bring all the controls up to modern controls. And we have to have that done. I I think we're under I'm going to get this date wrong. I think it's less than 18 months or our elevator gets shut off. It has to be modernized. So, we feel that we've done a very good job of both advertising, soliciting for bids. We did only receive one, but there's not a lot of companies doing elevator work. Um, and so we think we did also a good job of then negotiating with the contractor after the fact to make sure that the scope of work matched what we really need for an affordable price.

Okay. Yeah, I'm just uh thank you for putting that on the record. I wanted to make sure that the public was aware of that it was only one bid and that uh there was a good reason for it. Okay. So, we don't need to star that for Wednesday night. Uh, no. But can we mention the the price tag on that? Can uh I don't know it off the top of my head. I think it's like almost uh 200 something thousand. Yeah, I was going to say I thought we were just under 300,000. Okay, I'm I'm good if everybody else is good with that.

Okay. Any other agenda issues for Wednesday night? Anything? Okay. So, we've got um two uh motions here and I guess uh I'll I'll read them. Uh tourism advisory committee motion. I'll read them and then I'll ask question as to what it means. Motion to recommend the listed changes of the tourism promotion grant to the city council adjusting the scoring application to reflect the following changes. More weight on offseason tourism. Acknowledging previous awards and using inverted scale. Using an inverted scale for previous awards not used. Added points from multi-day or multiple events in the year. Correct redundancy. Modify location criteria to allow for anyone in Josephin County. Uh call to action. Move to council workshop. Move to council meeting and take no action. And um so do we discuss that now?

Uh yeah, ultimately you can discuss that. I know that this is an item that's coming in front of you. Again, it's on the back of the agenda to be scheduled. Uh we can incorporate those comments into the discussion when we move forward. So I don't know if you need to discuss that in detail unless you want to have a specific workshop just on their motions. We will address some of that when we bring that forward to you in an upcoming uh workshop. Okay. So that's going to be covered in an ongoing workshop and you'll defend what those terms mean inverted scale and whatever.

I if I could just add so typically you know we do the tourism grants twice a year. We do a spring and a fall. The fall one uh gets advertised typically uh around July 1 when they submit applications. We do like to let the applicants know what the criteria is when we put out the application. So, um I would just add I guess that that's the one piece that it would be a risk if if since this is on the back and there is no date assigned. Um if it goes after July 1, we would be advertising the um current standards. We wouldn't be advertising the ones that are proposed. So, I think they were hoping

if the council supported it to put for the fall round for the fall cycle to be able to do that. So I would just add that that's that's so I think what you're saying is that we need to get this uh it was going to be brought forward in a workshop. So we need to have the workshop no later than June. So I think I think one of our June workshops if we can schedule it that's what they would prefer or we would be working off of our current standards. Okay. So does council have an opinion on that? Do we want to try to get this on a workshop in June or are we going to work on our current standards until we get to it? And Victoria,

well, I definitely do want to talk about it in a workshop. So, if we can just move it to a June workshop, that would be that would be great so that we can accomplish both things. U if we change anything, it'll be done before July and then we will have the workshop. That's what I would be in favor of. That seems reasonable, right? Okay. So, in June, we'll we'll make note of that and bring it to the next agenda setting.

Gotcha. Okay. So, now let's see. Historical building sites commission motion to recommend the city council authorize the installation of a new historic marker to be mounted on the south elevation of the downtown welcome center as depicted in the attached exhibits. The marker supports the purpose statement of the historic buildings and sites commission in section 7.061. 061 of the Grants Pass Development Code to in quotes strengthen public support for historic preservation efforts within the community, foster civic pride, and encourage culture cultural u heritage tourism. Call to action. Move to council workshop. Approve the motion or deny the motion. Um Joel, uh I was there so I know most about it and Brad knows what I don't know. So we we will be fully informed. Um it's a small amount of money. I think it's within Aaron's u um authority. And what it is, it's it's a u a little plaque cabinet and inside there are historical photos. And so there's historical photos of a big tree being cut in the faller laying down there and looking at you. And then there's another photo of somebody rowing on the raft on the road. Um there's a f a photo of downtown saying visitors have to register especially if you're from California. Um there there there's there's a bunch of historic there I think there's what six seven historic photos that the commission recommended and u and it's for like $30,000 uh dollars. Oh, I think it'd be less than that. We don't have a full number, but the cabinet itself is around 3,000. And then we have installation and then we

You're right. You're right. So, it's going to be it's going to be probably less than $5,000. So, I I wouldn't say it's a no-brainer. So, so just um where typically would that money come from? It's a small amount of money, but where does that money come from, Aaron or Brad? Yeah. Well, we with a welcome center, it's it's typically going to come from the welcome center. Well, not we don't have a downtown downtown services. Yeah, downtown has its own budget. The downtown services budget. Yes. Turn that off for around $2 or $3,000. I I I would say closer to five.

Oh, five. Okay. or or more because we don't we don't have a final on it because the the the contractor who's building the cabinet is not willing to build the back of it because of how it attaches to the siding. He's concerned about that. So, we're going to have to get somebody different to actually cut and mount and we don't have that figure yet. So, roughly how Joel or Brad how big is this thing? I'd say it was maybe uh 3 ft by 3 feet. Maybe 3 ft by 4 feet. Yeah, it's a little bit wider than it is tall. Yeah, I think it's closer to that n like 90 in wide by

their original photographs. They're really They're not going to put the originals in there. They're going to put copies, but there were going to be copies of the original photographs. Yeah. Oh, Kathleen, uh, should we at all run this by the tourism or visit Grants Pass since they're going to be running the welcome center where they want to have it or if they should have any say in it? I mean, that's really up to you. You you know, it's the facility is ours is is the cities. They're just they just have the ability to operate inside of it. This is an exterior uh improvement.

Yeah. Yeah. I I I can say that when I travel, whether it's Bandon or Bend or anywhere else, I absolutely love looking at historical pictures of the place I'm I'm going to. I mean, to me, it's fascinating and it just lands me in the place I am and kind of their history. So, I I like the idea. I would support it. Um but again, we can I I can't see moving it to a workshop. There doesn't seem to be that much more to know about it. We can approve or deny the motion. So, Seth, um, yeah, I'll make a motion to to approve the motion.

Okay. Second, Eric, any more discussion? I I just have one thing to add. I want to confirm. Bradley, do you know for sure that downtown has the $5,000 for this? If not, then I'd want to confirm, and if it's okay that we have it, we'll move forward with the motion. If not, I think we need to come back to council and ask if they're willing to pull that from contingency to utilize that those dollars. Yeah. No, I unfortunately I did not check for this last couple of months in the in the fiscal year. Um I I I do not know. I was just trying to answer the question where it would come from typically because I think that was the question. But um

Okay. So, if we approve the motion, then you guys are just going to have to find if you've got the money and if you don't, we'll get the bad news. Yeah. Yeah. If if you approve the motion, we'll move forward with utilizing the the downtown services uh dollar m dollar figure, which we should have that. I just didn't want to be in a spot where if we didn't uh we'd want to come back to you and get authorization to use contingency funds for it. Okay. Any further discussion? Yeah. The other thing, Erin, um I know it's it's a little bigger pot of money, but I would guess tourism dollars could do it too instead of contingency if if we wanted to save contingency. Just a thought.

Okay. Eric, do so just to clarify, do the question that I have is do we do we need to have this uh specified of where the funds are coming from or what can can you clarify again what the options are? Yeah, currently right now the funds are going to come from downtown. services unless there aren't funds available then we need authorization of council to utilize contingency funds or another source that I'd come back to you for uh that guidance. Okay, we ready to vote? Um we had a second. We have a motion and a second. So Seth, yes. Yes. Yes. Joel, yes. Victoria, yes.

Eric, yes. Okay, motion passes. Oh, Indra. Yes. Great. Unanimous eight to the And then I'm sorry, I forgot what the next thing I was uh that would you've just reviewed everything. It would now be uh concluding this meeting and moving into executive session with the reading of the executive session. No, we we already had agenda. We talked about agenda, right? Um did you have anything about agenda or no? Not not okay. Okay. Um or future agenda.

Okay. Okay. So Okay. So we have a motion to uh adjourn this and go into executive session. Everybody says yes. Thumbs up. Okay. Okay. We're now Can you read the the monument for executive session? Yeah. Where is it? It should be right underneath the mayor's file.