City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening everybody. Thanks for coming to your city council. It's May 11th. I'll call us to order. First we're going to do is silence our cell phones. We're going to stand and say the pledge of allegiance to the flag which stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Abigail, do we have any agenda additions or corrections?

No, mayor. We do not have any changes. Um, with some of you I had said we would not have an executive session. That is incorrect. We will have an executive session tonight.

All right. Late breaking news. Uh, now is the time for now is the time for business from the audience. No person shall be disorderly, abusive, or disruptive of the orderly conduct during this time. There shall be no audience demonstrations such as applause, cheering, display, signs, or or conduct disruptive. Such conduct may be the cause for immediate termination of business from the audience by the mayor. No person shall address council without first being recognized by the mayor. Please state your full name for the record when it is your turn. First we have on Zoom Michael Sprag. Not online. Next we have Ellen followed by Bradford.

Ready. Hi, I'm Helen Wild from Wild in Water, a 501c3 nonprofit here in Hood River that expands water sports opportunities like stand up paddling and wing foiling for anyone in the community. Um, we were told this year by the court that we needed a transient merchants permit which I have applied for and it was my understanding that I could ask the city council to wade a fee for us on that permit. The reason I'm bothering, even though it's only $146, is we have seen our substantial stalwart funders disappear this year. And in order to continue our free community program and all the other things that we offer, any bit of help would be appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you, Alan. Next, Bradford, followed by L. Hi, I'm Bradford Peron. Uh, I own the first n or the first national bank building, the howerunner building from oak on third street around Cascade. Um, we have a hotel called Thistle Down on Oak uh which I'm putting and uh enlarging on the top floor to be a hotel there. And uh recently there has been these daily passes that are issued and I wanted to uh find out if I I wanted to make it present that if it's allowed for one hotel to me it should be allowed for even the smaller hotels. Um they uh those passes are being used and you the the whole front of my third street uh will be full of daily passes uh which prevents tenants uh and they're we have about 35 tenants in the building. Um, and we have counselors, uh, we have doctors, people picking up medications, we have CPAs, attorneys, people picking up tax returns, and not ever having parking is really affecting the businesses in my buildings. So, those day passes are creating an issue. Uh but my main point is if it's allowed for one hotel or one organization or business I would think that it should be available to all businesses including thistle down on oak.

Thank you. Thank you L followed by Pasquali.

Give you guys these. I've one for the record. Yes. Mayor, council, uh, thank you. I'm Lock Litworth. I'm one of the owners of the Lightwell Hotel and Spa. I want to start by acknowledging something. Uh, the retailers and restaurant owners who've raised concerns about downtown parking. You know, I get they're not making things up. Um, the frustration is real. It is palpable. Uh, when a customer can't find a place to park, it feels like a lost sale, and I take that very seriously. Uh, I also don't read these concerns as anyone wishing hotel guests would stay away. Uh, the retailers that I talked to understand what visitors mean for downtown. Uh, they fill the tables and at dinner and they buy the gifts on the way out of town. They're a big reason storefronts stay open through the shoulder season. We are not on opposite sides of this. What I'd ask the council to weigh is magnitude. Uh, I was looking at the packet. I saw the city planner uh supposed to note tonight that Hoover sells about 100 hotel guest parking passes each month. Uh, I will say expect that number to go up. Um, and I also want to say, you know, not everybody uses them the same way. Uh, we sold 25 of them today to Forest Service folks who were there for a three-hour conference. We asked, "Why didn't you pay the meters?" Because by buying the this this piece of paper, it goes in the invoice and I can reimburse it and it's easier that way. So, we're going to sell a lot of these things. They're not going to be all day users all of the time. In fact, a lot of folks are going to go on adventures during the day, go up to the mountain, go to the waterfront, right? So, there's dynamis only. that's not apparent. Um, as I said, some guests don't uh don't park on their paths for long stretches. Uh, the city's own 2019 study was really clear on what's actually driving congestion in the core. And it wasn't visitors. It was price a price signal that was too weak to discourage all day parking by people who aren't shopping or dining. Uh, you know, these are folks go into one building in the morning and they

stay there all day and they come out in the evening and that's what they're doing. uh you know our guests you know they they don't necessarily want to have yet another app on their phone you know they don't want to worry about am I getting a ticket out of town that I now have to negotiate that occurs to put river as a brand if that happens so it's convenience it's good for us I'll uh I will say we're working hard to negotiate off streetet parking for our self parking guests and we're launching a valet service as soon as we can uh we don't want our guests competing for street parking either um The strongest argument, the hotel pass program, it doesn't add parkers to downtown. What it does is change where they park. Uh the pass is not valid on Oak Street, though. It's only valid on it's not valid on the busiest retail blocks by design, right? It steers our guests to secondary streets and away from the corridors where retailers feel the most pressure. If you take the pass away and those guests, those guests aren't going to disappear. They're not going to go away. They're going to pay through the app and look for parking at any open spot, including the ones on Oak Street. And that's where the program currently keeps clear for for shoppers that are there for a short period of time. So, I just ask you please, you know, don't eliminate or weaken the program. Um, just, you know, stay with the program that's working. Thank you.

Thank you.

um council. Um Mr. Mayor, my name is Pasquali Baron and I live on 1730 Orchard Road. Um I wasn't going to speak to the u uh the topic that Lock has, but having been a previous hotel owner, I thought I would throw this in. the two hotels, the one the Hood River Hotel that I restored and um the light well that's just been restored at huge cost. No, no, no doubt you you folks know is an asset and our feather and a feather to our collective cap. Um, I'm sure you can find ways of making them work out because they have spent incredible amount of money, uh, sweat and talent to make it make it work. Um, anything you can do to help them out in that in that regard, I encourage it. Um, what I do want to talk about tonight are two things. the in lie of fee uh that's been that's been around since 2006. Um and u in the last 20 years it's hardly uh fetched any money for the for the city. Uh I think probably the last the largest contributor was probably the light well. Um it's it's made many many projects that were viable not going into effect because of the costs. Um councils present and and and past have um struggled with how to make it work and and and changing the price structure or the fee structure up and down. The point is even the 2019

city um uh parking study said and then I'm I'm paraphrasing that it was it was a failure. Um and uh so if it's been a failure for 20 years, I ask that you consider shelfing it. uh because it's just been certainly in the in the building community, it's been a huge annoyance. That said, um what I ask you to consider in the parking realm is to look at parking as a as a public good, which it is. A public good should be paid by all people who use it, not by the incidental. um next building that comes along that can be charged the the inlu of fees. Um if we look at the parking um regimen both off and off the on and off street holistically and as a public good we can start to charge accordingly. The one lever that the city has is the fee that it charges. Uh by all accounts and again going back to parking studies um the fee has been too small and therefore people uh abuse it by parking too too long. Uh I'll stop there. I want to say one last thing. The parking study also mentions that the currently free parking spaces on industrial and seven should be metered. Um I ask you that you look at your parking study and pay attention to it and perhaps follow up. Thank you.

Thank you.

I think we have neither presentation nor public hearing. Abigail, that's correct. We're ready for the consent agenda. We have one OLCC permit application that I will take off the consent agenda. I would entertain a motion for the remainder. Uh, mayor, I would also like to ask a question for item number three. So, if you can pull items two and three, please. Done. Thank you. Can your honor? Yeah. Go. We see that we're trying to get approved to see. Right. Did you guys get a chance? I just happened to catch it. It came in very late breaking. Another OLCC permit. So, we'll have those three items not on the consent agenda. Um, thank you. We have one and four, the remaining standing survivors.

Move to approve items one and four on the consent agenda. Moved by Pollson. Second. Second by Rivera. Uh, any discussion on that? All in favor? I. Yes.

Opposed? Chair votes time motion passes. One comment I'll just make on item number four, which was Abigail explained it to me there. Opt into recreational immunity. This has been an amazing many years and then I was the president of a nonprofit ski area. like this is such a challenging thing to figure out how. Of course, we want no one ever to get injured, but a lot of recreation is not happening because of the uh the tort claims and it's uh the legislature seems to work on it every year and she assures me this is the move for us is to opt into the statewide agreement and hope for the best. Uh yeah, please. Is there uh do we have a certain obligation to post signage or how are we communicating this piece?

Um I think in order to fully uh take full advantage of the recreational immunity you should that um that these places are available for recreational purposes. So, so what before you tonight is just the parks and right uh the trails and rights of way that besides the legislature, the other entity has been tweaking this program for years as the courts. So, one Ziggs and the other Zags to trying to respond to the other. Um so, this one just deals with the trails and undeveloped and developed rights of way, which was in response to another court case. Um, so for your parks going forward, I'm not sure if you've um what signage you have, but it's it's always useful to, you know, you know, kind of state explicitly about, you know, local the city is, you know, immune from, you know, you're using this at your own risk for for recreational purposes and just beware kind of thing. So that's a helpful part. This trail thing was sort of like out of the blue. Uh we have three items remaining. Two OLCC's and a construction contract.

I'll move to uh approve both OLCC permits and the construction contract. Moved by Pollson. Second. Second by Stina. Discussion. I do I have a question about number three the uh water mane replacement. I'm trying to understand that Ajax came in significantly below what was the estimate and I'm just trying to understand what were some of the reasons and if any of those reasons could create any potential change risk down the road. Thank you counselor. I'm looking to see if uh Adam or Randy can come on the screen and answer that, please.

Can you hear me? Yes, I hear you. Go ahead. Uh yeah, the uh construction market is uh extremely uh aggressive right now. So, um that the the cost are uh trending um with with the most recent bids that we've had. I would say the last the last three uh capital projects that we've had construction costs are um lower coming in lower than what the engineered estimate is. So not a surprise there. And then uh the um I guess what you're getting at is is change orders on this one. This is a pretty straightforward project. Don't foresee anything uh coming up there.

Okay. Thank you.

I had a similar question. I'm glad I'm glad you asked that. Um, but I'm I'm kind of curious. Um, do we do our uh engineering estimates in house or is that something that you have somebody else do ahead of because it was like a $350,000 difference from the um from from the lowest bid. It just seems pretty significant. So, the last again the last three projects that we've bid out have all been through different engineering firms that were contracted through and uh I would say they're they're all similar too. So, um again, not not surprised. Okay. Thank you.

Any other questions on on on these motions? Uh all in favor? I I abstension.

I I will abstain from OLCC permit applications. This is not a reflection of these establishments, business or their owners. Rather, I object to the fact that we don't have enough transportation options for people who visit these establishments. As a result, they may end up getting behind the wheel and putting themselves and others at risk. Uh the recent adoption of the code allowing transportation networks is a step forward, but uh access and capacity remains limited, especially during late evening hours and in our upper valley. If we and our countywide partners are able to provide adequate transportation during late evenings and weekends, I'll start approving OLCC applications.

Uh opposed. Chair votion passes. Uh I think that finally makes it through the consent agenda there. Uh uh discussion items. We have three thanks to the folks who came to chime in on these challenging uh issues about parking. There is a 700page book called There Is No Such Thing as Free Parking that is sort of a favorite of mine because it is so interesting and challenging and complicated. And here we go. Abigail, hotel parking pass program.

Thank you, Mayor. Uh the parking pass for hotels has existed for a long time at least since 2014 probably before that. Uh and I think that um pass has kind of evolved over the years. At one time it was a very limited uh kind of early morning pass for folks who were going to so they didn't have to jump out of bed and before the checkout time of their hotel. Other times it has been an all day pass. Uh so as you heard from your uh folks today there have been a lot of comments and thoughts on it. You also received a fair bit of public test um written public testimony on that today from the city recorder forwarded to you. Uh so I'm just checking in to see if you wish to make any changes and if so what direction you would like to take.

I'll start. Um it it in my mind it's always there's a little bit of a what do they say? A body at rest remains at rest. Like it's it ain't broke. Let's not you know why are we going to make a change? I I guess what I what I then argue with myself is that uh had these conditions existed at the time, I'm not sure that this is the decision we would have made. So, I'm quite open to hearing I heard I think three or four arguments already this evening and interested in sort of fleshing this out and seeing what is the will of council to uh to to address this question.

Glattis and then Ben. Yeah, I just wanted to thank Visit Hood River and all of the local businesses and the individuals who are here today to give their input. Uh the letter that we received in our packet from Visit Hood River states that the parking program itself isn't an issue that it's the duration and the location. So rather than eliminating the program, I think we should explore how do we create designated hotel pling zones, ensuring that there's maps and that we're communicating that out so folks clearly know where to park. Um, and that we look at specific time zones such as like an 8:00 PM to 10:00 a.m. uh for parking. That way it is creating opportunity for folks to park overnight, but then they can move their vehicles um if needed. So I I have a couple other suggestions, but I want to make sure that I'm leaving room for other peers. I don't think we should eliminate it, rather discussion around how we should enhance it based on the feedback that we heard in our packets. Yeah, I'm generally in agreeance with that. And I almost wonder if it's a good time to chat about this would be during the parking study update. Um, you know, that is going to be coming down the road just because it's all kind of part and parcel with this and maybe have it be a more holistic entity that's included in that.

I have a downtown parking pass myself that entitles me to park some places, but really quite a lot of not places. uh much more restrictive than what was referred to. It's not just Oak Street that I may not park on. It's like from 1st to 6th or something. So there there's an exist existing pass that is much more uh sort of steering towards the periphery and perhaps that could be sort of instructive as to perhaps categorize this if we made a change. Anna, I' I'd like clarification. Um is this parking pass currently available to all business owners and hotels? I mean we can use it any anybody can use it like what are what's the parameters for using this pass currently

this pass is uh is intended for hotel guests only so it's not all businesses but it is open to all hotels in the downtown core so any hotel can come to the city and ask to participate in this program I think so I I do want to clarify that I'm not sure if it if uh hotels outside of the downtown area are eligible like if you stayed at like uh the Holiday in near Derrick Bean if you would be eligible for the pass. Okay. Um, and the 100 passes, is that the cap per month or that's just what we're currently

Thank you for bringing that up because I do want to update that number. Um, we have been selling them in blocks of 100. Um, and um, Lightwell has been buying them twice a month. So, we're currently selling 200 uh, a month to Lightwell. Um, as far as I know, um, I don't know of any other sales to other hotels. I do know that um uh Hood River Hotel used to use this many many years ago. I don't think they've used it recently and I do think there's one other hotel that has used it on very rare occasions.

So, one thing I'm kind of curious about and this is kind of the discussion thing and maybe we should talk about it more when we I think a more comprehensive look at parking is probably warranted, but um the way that it is right now I think it's our our parking meters are from 8 to 6. So, if somebody buys a pass and they're able to use it all day, that's 10 hours. I think our current rate is $1.25. So, it's we're subsidizing this a little bit with like it's it's actually cheaper than um what it would cost to park all day. So, that's one thing I think we ought to maybe consider. And the other thing that's in our memo is um the current program is 8 a.m. to midnight. So, I know we don't we don't meter after 6:00 pm, but I just I think we should we should be thinking about that. And I do really appreciate the comments of like if this is going to be available to to one group, it should be available to, you know, I don't know, we we should think about that too, but just equity and um and and provide clarity. I liked also the idea of zones that, you know, that um that was presented to us by the visit Hood River letter.

Uh a question and then I'll get my comment. So, you know, we've talked about zones before. Um, and the feedback from the city is always like, "It's really hard to do zones. It's going to cost a lot of money, a lot of enforcement, etc." Um, you don't have to answer now, but if that's I actually don't know enough about that. If that's true, I I'd like to know a little bit more about zones because

it it's it seems that it's been challenged in the past as something that's difficult and expensive. As as the mayor said, there's no such thing as, you know, no free parking. Uh, kind of. So, let's I' I'd like some more information on that. Um because that's that's uh to councelor Cavaler's point like if if we could do zones like let's let's look look at that. Let's leave nothing off the table. Um the complex thing about parking in any city um especially here is like it's a it's an ecosystem that if you change one thing it's going to change something for somebody else. Right? So, if we said, "All right, well, no more parking on Cascade anymore, then State Street's going to bear the brunt of it, and we're going to hear from businesses on State Street, etc., etc., right?" So, um, I think that has to be studied. Um, to Mr. Baron's point, we do have some areas that are not metered yet, um, that could be metered. I personally push back a lot on, uh, industrial when we looked at that as an option, uh, because there were a lot more workers downtown. um seems like we've we've had a reduction since then um especially from the the workers that are up in that area or or down in that area depending on how you want to look at it. So I think that's something that should be considered as well. Um I do think the parking is is pretty cheap in town. Um, and you know, um, if somebody is going to, uh, park all day and, you know, it's it's no big deal for them to just put three hours in and and then add in addition to that, I think we should be looking that at that as well. Um, I don't think it's fair if someone's going to go buy a coffee or, you know, want to want to walk around downtown uh, all day that they should, you know, just be able to easily do that. Uh, there should be some some cost associated with that. Um, that being said, if we did that, there's not a whole lot of parking options outside of that. The lots are full. Um, right now, so that's an issue. Uh, I think, you

know, it's been since 2019 since the parking study. Um, if I was voting for a work plan today, I would probably say a parking study is needed and I I would say we need to start looking at the parking garage again. Um, in fact, I' I'd like to look at the parking garage as maybe an option that we could use affordable housing dollars to build affordable housing on top of a parking garage and etc. Right? So, um, all that to say that, you know, I've heard from a lot of businesses that are quite upset that they don't have parking. Um, and and I know like I I take these comments um and and try to weigh the emotion to it. Like I hear from people that say parking is terrible. It's I can't I've never found a parking spot downtown. Not true. Right. Um there are people that kind of missed the old way Hood River was and why can't I park exactly where I want to park right in front of that building? I think the ship is sailed on that. So we're sort of, you know, stuck with without a lot of options. I I think taking away um the parking permit from the hotels uh is is problematic because where are those people going to park, right? Um so I think we should look for a more equitable solution similar to the parklets. parklets take up all day. We charge them exactly what it would be to do all day parking, right? So, um if we were to adjust parking, uh rates, then you know, you just multiply whatever those hours are and that's what the parking pass should be. Um but, you know, to to to Lock's point earlier, you know, hotels are are not required to look for um any options outside of of this program right now. They're not incentivized to do that. they're not decentized to do that. Um, and I if as we have development downtown, you know, we we see a lot of activity around hotels right now and and options to stay downtown. I think we're going to see more and more and more of it, right? So, the the problem is only going to get worse and we can't ask Cascade Street to

bear the brunt of it. We can't ask State Street to bear the brunt of it. Um, I think something like having them available anywhere is probably a better idea than not, but I think we should probably work towards more parking options for people that are staying here overnight in general. Um, since we're out of parking for those options and lots. Doug, I want to understand one thing you said that I didn't quite get. You talked about there's been a reduction. Help me understand. You mean fewer workers are needing Yeah. So what's happened specifically on industrial you know Tofurks moved their operations down uh to primarily their other building. I see. So that building uh and also Fullale a few others that that work downtown in the early mornings

they were highly utilizing that industrial street. Yep. That's not as utilized as it once was and there's more parking available there. Um thank you. Still is quite busy but not if you don't get there by 5 in the morning you're not getting a spot busy as it was. Thank you. Uh, Ben, and then Gunnness. Um, this is a question for staff. The There's a very good point about the subsidizing. The $10 fee, was that just a leftover from when the parking rates were a dollar as opposed to $125 and it just wasn't adjusted upward or do you know where that $10 fee came from? If that was the same since 2014, I do not recall the It's a It's based on

Oh, it's Thank you. Uh, finance director just said it's based on an eight hour parking day. So it does uh go up when the when the parking meters have been increased. That fee has also been increased. Do you want to come up here? Buy eight get two free it sounds like. Yeah. No, it's um so there's also a construction there's also a construction parking pass. Uh it's also based on 8 hour parking day. So those passes are based on 8 hour parking day. Oh. Oh. So they're not $10. The Sorry, the passes are 10. They are 10 because it's eight times 125. Right. Right. Gotcha. Go ahead.

What What is So, I was looking in our budget book, page 45, and I just want to make sure that I am reading this correctly. Our annual revenue from the hotel passes, is that $110,000? What is Oh, no. How much is it then? Um, can I think at this point uh since uh November of 2025, it's $11,000. 11. Okay. So I don't know full year but that would be my guess.

I you know I agree with um a lot of the comments that my peers have been mentioning. I think uh this also ties into the to a larger parking study and that we just take this opportunity to think bigger. Uh downtown parking concerns will continue to increase uh in addition to looking at a parking infrastructure fund that we also talk about exploring mixed use in the downtown area. So, designated hotel areas, uh what are the restriction in the hours, what is the parking fee increase, a clear revenue uh destination, and ensuring that we really are talking about a specific parking uh infrastructure fund for a garage that we know we need.

Uh Amanda, I'm sorry, Amanda. Then he threw a pen. Um, and I know we have a parking study like you're tagged or whatever. Is that Do we know when that's happening and when we might Thank you, counselor. We have proposed a parking study in the budget for next year. So, it is not yet approved until you approve the budget. Uh, and so if you want to expand the scope of that budget, I would like to know that soon so we can adjust that budget. Um, our plan was to do it this winter. So, not till the winter, right? I don't know if we have a specific time. We need to work with uh with all of you on the scope and then um award that contract. Anna and then Doug. Doug and then Anna.

I I just want to say that I I think we should do something before the parking studies concluded in an interim basis because

I you know as I stated before sometimes you'll hear from people that say parking is terrible and you know they they have no data. Uh I believe the businesses on Cascade that they're being impacted. Um, I've tried to go to a few meetings down there and it's it's busier than it used to be and we're not in the busy season yet. So, I think we have to explore opening it up to the other streets or something like that to produce, you know, bearing the brunt for just that that one street where everybody seems to park because it's the the it's close to lightwell, right? So, um I think we need to I just want to make a comment. I think we should we should do a lot of the things we're talking about with the parking study. Think big with the parking study. Not sure it would have a budget impact, but let's let's get the parking study. Let's talk about a structure. Maybe if we can talk about that as part of the work plan next year, but we can't just say when all that's done, then we'll make some decisions. Like we have to make some decisions now, I think. Um,

Anna, so um I want to go back to the 8 hour parking day. 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. is 12 is 10 hours though, right? So we only enforce for eight. What's the Okay. On those passes, we're just charging for eight. considered you get you get you get some for free. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't um so we are subsidized. So I just want to make sure I understood that. Okay. And then the other part I can just repeat that for the folks online who would not have heard uh Chris because you didn't speak into the microphone. Uh I think that was uh it's a it's a 10-hour pass but we just charged eight hour day because it's generally been like a work day. Okay.

That had been kind of the construction pass had maybe came first and this maybe just was modeled after that one.

Okay. Um, and then the other thing is, so we have this 2019 parking study, and I'm not sure if anything was done with the parking study once we got it. Um, but I I would like to actually spend some time reviewing it before I decide whether or not we actually need to do another parking study because that's not that old. Um, and really what's changed since then? I mean, we had the COVID dip and then we've got some additional businesses downtown, but maybe it's a better use of our resources and our money to like like maybe we should review the 2019 parking study, see what we think about it, and see if there's anything that in there that needs to be implemented before we do an update to it. I I don't know.

And some years ago, we did provide an update to council on um on the status of all of the recommendations. And I would say the majority of the over half of them have been implemented in some way or were underway. Um, but I can find that and we can refresh that and send that back out to you.

I think it's worth getting fairly precise with our language here. There's the parking study, and I'm not in the biz, but I've been through many of these. Then there's sort of like like a survey, which is one of the things I believe 2019 re recommended was if an area, a lot, or the streets reaches 85% saturation, then we will take action and and raise the price. That's not a whole study. That's just sort of like hiring an intern to go check some, you know, like at 11:00 how many spaces are available. So, let's make sure that we are are all talking the same language with what a study is versus taking a look at our utilization rate and therefore perhaps taking some action. Uh, two other points quickly. I just love Lock's point that like of course the the the the sandwich shop on Cascade is annoyed that there's no parking and of course Lock's customer is eating lunch because he's Lock's customer. So then the sandwich shop is happy. So it's, you know, it's so complicated. And finally, we once had a piece of testimony that I still remember 20 years later. He said, "You guys don't have a parking problem. I used to live in somewhere somewhere some state and we had no one coming to our town. there was vast acreage of empty places. That's a parking problem. So, you know,

thank you, mayor. And actually, you uh and just as you said, there's different studies and stuff. Chris just reminded me that we are not looking to do a full-blown reinvent the wheel parking study. We are looking to do a an update to the 2019 study. One of the major pieces of that was uh that recommended that we move to pay by plate uh and an app. and we now have that and we see some of the um things that were not anticipated at that time. So that's one example of why an update might be needed. Thank you. I unilaterally jumped in. Amanda, did Chris, did you have something more to add to that? I just spoke for you. No, no, I think it's fine.

Okay. Thank you. Um, yeah. I guess just going back to like whatever we're doing in de or in the winter like it doesn't like why are we doing it in the winter also because the summer is the busy time and we have the problems. I mean I get it fluctuates. So it's just like if we can't do it a study or whatever we're doing this summer that's like a whole another year if we want to do it in the summer. And I don't know, just seems like a long time to like agree. I don't think we should wait until we do all that to like make some changes with that. bless.

I just want to re reiterate that visit Hood River, the letter asks that we review the location of the passes, duration, and the daytime turnover and agree that we can do those three sooner rather than later as we continue to have conversations about, you know, parking update inl and all the others. So I think I'm hearing a consensus that gosh we would like to fold this into our study update but I do think uh both councelor Stpina and councelor Gakei just kind of brought the is there a change we would like to make in the interim until we have time to actually do the the study or to do the update and are is that last bit a question Abigail? Yes the first one was checking my assumption I think I have heard a desire that we study this question more in depth.

Yes I I think I heard that. Yeah, great. And then part two, I also heard a little bit of a desire for some interim solution, which could be keep the current system, eliminate the current system, change the current system. Another option that I haven't identified. Um, so I want to check in. Is that also a step you'd like to take tonight in the in the sort of before summer time time frame? Right. Yeah.

Uh, question. So, is that the sort of thing where staff will come back and say, "These are the options that you have that are realistic because like what I don't want to do is is sit up here and be like, why don't we just open it up to everybody and not think about the repercussions of that, right?" Like, I want I want some some some data driven decision that, as I said earlier, we don't just kind of come up with something and then we've created another problem somewhere else in the city for parking because we just came up with that. like what would it take staff to weigh options?

What data would be helpful? I mean uh so visit we asked visit Hood River to check in with um businesses for their perception. Um if we were to actually do parking counts that's pretty expensive and so I'd want to uh check in with you know that would be a budget item I would need to bring it to you if you wanted to do a full-blown data. I'd also say it's March May 9th and so I don't know what kind of timeline you would like to make a decision. It's less about data um that we need to collect and more about data that we have. Um I suppose, you know, um I'm thinking of, you know, we we've mentioned a few options up here. You could listen back to it and say, well, you said this, we think that that could be a problem and without having a study to back it. Um just let us know what our blind spots are in in these types of situations. You know, I think if one of the options was to open up the parking program to the entire downtown area, I want to know if staff has concerns about that and why. For example,

all downtown residents, businesses. No, no, for the the hotels. If we were to take the hotel, it is available to all hotels at this time area. So like Oak Street's not available for example, right? Like so like that that sort of thing. This is confusing to I want to make sure you're saying more spots would be excluded from using the parking spot pass. No, I'm saying if we if we were to to include Oak Street, for example, so Lux customer may park on Oak Street is what you're suggesting. Yep. Okay.

Or if we were to have the rate be um exactly what we do with the parkletits, like pay for all the hours that you're using, right? Um are there any issues with that sort of thing? like I just I just would like staff to weigh in and not be caught on the spot right now. Glass was that? Yeah, I agree. And you know, I've mentioned it two other times that as of now in the interim that we review the location of the passes, which could mean designated hotel zones, the duration and the daytime turnover as requested in the letter by visit Hood River. And that the third piece, as councelor Stpin has mentioned, do staff think that it would be a good idea to open it up to other businesses besides hotels. So, I think those are the three things I'm hearing in the letter and that at least I I'm asking like review the location of the passage duration and the daytime turnover.

Council, can I ask for clarification on what you mean by um hotel zone? Are you like is that designated parking that would be like only hotel guests could park there? Um and Okay. So, right now my understanding is that they cannot park on Oak Street for example. Right. Any other metered spot?

Yeah. Any other spot. So, is it open to every other spots or is it just Oak Street where individuals cannot park that have these hotel passes? Like, what are these designated zones that would exist specific to using this pass since as of now it's just open to hotels? So, if you expanded it to other businesses, would then that broaden the zone where folks are able to park? I agree with Glattus that we should take the visit Hood River information as very valuable and really really tend to steer in that direction. I think Ben was next. Oh, well, in the packet, you know, it mentions a like three options. And one of those options is to do nothing at all with the hotel pass program. And just to I don't know, maybe help staff out to cross off one of the options. Am I hearing from council that we don't want to do nothing and leave it alone? Correct. Is anybody in favor of doing nothing and making no changes?

No. Okay. Just trying to be helpful. That's great. Do you want to continue? Oh, so you're on a roll, Ben. Come on. Keep going. Nope. I'm I'm tapped out. I'm going out on a high note. Likewise. Um I don't think we want to discontinue it either. So we're not we're we're eliminating two. Yeah, that's any anybody in favor of eliminating the program. Dude, we're cruising. Okay. Okay. We're almost there. I also need to modify the program in some way.

Um I just want um maybe Glattus, could you clarify, you were talking about maybe opening up the program to others and I was thinking about like restaurants and boutiques and stuff like that. And I I can't imagine other than their employees, which is kind of the idea is we're trying to not have employees parking in that spot for eight hours. But I can't imagine I don't I I guess I don't know. I can't imagine other businesses saying I'm going to buy a block of 100 passes for my clients to come and use when they're only going to be shopping. I don't know like that seems

I think at one point I heard somebody mention like do we open this up to other maybe it was a part of the comment like do we open it up to other businesses. I'm not saying that we should or shouldn't. I'm saying that staff gives us a recommendation. We think as staff that as of now you should keep it as a hotel pass only. Here are the designated zones. um or if there is a recommendation of yes, we think you should open it up to other businesses and then that would potentially broaden the zones. So really just looking at staff to give us a recommendation. Do we just continue to keep it as a hotel program or do we expand it to other businesses as well?

So my understanding was that that is this is a day pass not specific to hotels. Anybody can use it except is that not right? It's uh for hotel guests. Okay.

Right. It's not for employees and not even hotel employees. It is only for hotel guests. And so if you wish to expand the program and I will say I brought you today a very narrow question uh about this particular pass um and we did um some uh engagement and uh got feedback on this particular specific question. So if you want to expand that, I would recommend that uh we do that in a more robust manner because there were lots of other people who would also like to be engaged in that conversation who were not asked because it was so narrowly focused on hotels.

Well, as I understand it, the reason really that this exists was to help uh eliminate the hassle of if you're an overnight guest having to move your car immediately in the morning. That's my understanding of like 2013 or so.

Yeah. So, to me, it wouldn't necessarily make sense to open up to all businesses because that doesn't really serve the nature of like what this program is for. And two, I would say that if we were to do anything, it would be to adjust the time frame so that it's still serving the nature of what I presume the program was attended, which is to not have to deal with being a hotel guest and move your car at 8:00 in the morning or whatever. Um, you know, when you have a checkout time at 11 or noon. Um, so that to me seems to be the thing that would make the most sense to adjust if we're looking for a a quick something to address with this program. Now, if we're looking to, hey, we need to make a change before the summer busy season and if we want to get into more of these, you know, this holistic study of all things parking. I know that there's I'm maybe being a little bit too grandiose in what I thought that this winter

the update was the winter update was but um after you know talking this out that seems to be one of the things that would maybe make the most sense to adjust and something that could be done in a shorter time span for instance and then and for instance I could imagine changing the price let's say $15 changing the hours as Ben says let's say till noon or one changing the spaces that are eligible. Say not only can you not park on Oak Street, but perhaps from 1st to 5th or something. So price, duration, location, those all seem like very reasonable places to push on this. Anna,

I I had a question actually for lock and how it's working too because um is this a pass that's only available to somebody who's checking out the next like if we were to to change it like Paul suggested and say it's only available until you know you can have this parking pass you have to move your car by noon or 1 then if somebody was staying for three or four or five days and they bought a pass every single day I mean they could you know arguably park their car in one spot and leave it there for three or 4 days and that that kind of undermines the ability and that was a comment that we received from another um business owner of like these cars are are using these passes and staying in a single spot for three days. Um I is that can I ask Lach to tell us if that's how it's being used or um I just want to have a clarification on that.

Uh Councilwoman, thank you for the question. Lock that where address is the same as was earlier. Uh to your question, there's uh really three kinds of users that we see. Um you know, and we don't have a huge data set, only been open since November, right? Um but we see, you know, probably 40% or so of our guests who come and they buy the pass and you know, probably threearters of the paid parking day they're in town. I 30 40% of the guests, right? The next percentage of guests use it as an in-n-out privilege parking where they know they're going to go out on the river. They know they're going to the mountain. They know they're going to go wherever and adventure. They don't want to worry about getting up in the morning. They don't want to download a p, you know, another app for parking in yet another city. They don't have to worry about uh getting a ticket, right? And so for them, it's the easy button to just, hey, I get to park in downtown as long as I'm not on Oak Street. And so that those folks uh this convenience pass and it keeps them off Oak Street. Um, the third is the folks I kind of alluded to who like the Forest Service folks today. We sold them 25 uh parking passes, all day parking passes for a three-hour conference because it allows them to get reimbured for it more easily. And that's really common with our business travelers. You know, the folks who just want to see it on the folio for the whole stay. Hey, they had parking for the whole week. Public gets paid for it. They're not paying for it. The company is also an easy button and it serves a very different function. Does that answer the question? Glass.

I just want to

No, no. I was just going to make a comment. Um, page 24 of our packet talks about three things. The location of the hotel parking passes, the dur the duration, and the length that could be tied to checkout. Uh, the impact of the daytime parking turnover. So I don't think it's for us to continue discuss discussing like what we think that we should just direct staff to continue working with visit Hood River interview lock and all the others in the area come up with some ideas and suggestions and then bring it back to us that we do that piece sooner rather than later as that was the three requests that we we received and that as we continue our conversations about update on a study that we do that as Well, but this is the interim piece that we can do sooner rather than later.

Folks good with that. I I just want to say that's what I've been dancing around to is is exactly that. So, thank you for putting it so succinctly. Folks good with that. Do you have a hope on a timeline? I'm a little bit humbled by the fact that it is May 9th. Say that last bit again. Uh I'm a little bit humbled by the fact that it's May 9th. And uh if you're talking about summer, I think summer is here. Uh so are you looking for staff to bring you some I'm not sure that I can get a definitive data driven answer to you by your next meeting.

I think that you take that talk to Katie and give us an update of when you think you can have that information for us so that we can have that discussion but sooner rather than later. Great. Okay. And do you want an interim solution in the middle of that or you want to hold make no changes until we come back to you with something further? I'm sorry. stuff talked over you.

I I would say that is the parking pass going to be tied to like checkout hours for example. Those are pieces that I don't understand too much of the program, but that lock and those individuals that are utilizing the passes will so that we gather that feedback from them of here's what we see work really well, here's what doesn't and that we make a rec or give direction based off of their recommendations because I don't utilize the past. I don't know how it works and what works well and doesn't.

Great. Thanks. Um there's it sounds like to me there are recommendations from this letter and our discussion and the 2019 study that there are things you can implement very quickly. Hours pricing for example. Um I imagine that we can implement some of those very quickly if we choose to do so. Right. If you identify them.

Yeah. Um, so I imagine we could make those decisions in pre- rapid order. Uh, going through and evaluating zones for example, that may take as an example may take more time and may be an item that we may not be able to address before summer or example. Um, so evaluating those sort of options or strategies that have already been evaluated or addressed in 2019 may be the quickest way to expedite a solution. understood that there are maybe some quick actions that can be taken now or at a future meeting when I bring you some data uh or uh you know and other longer term decisions uh that may have bigger impacts that might be harder to roll back you would want to wait until they could be studied more in depth.

Does that that clearly articulate my peers and then ma you had a thing skipping it? Okay. All right. I just keep I keep going. I don't want to lose lose this train of thought. So, you know, when we talk about where these are used, they're they're going to be used as close as they possibly can be used to the hotel, no matter what we do, right? So, any hotel, which I mean, whatever hotel got it, any hotel, they're going to want to any hotel, they're going to park the closest to it. Um, is there a way for us to sell or limit the amount of parking passes and put a street name on it? or something like that.

So that Sorry, I've given out all of my Cascade ones today. You can park on Oak Street. Sorry, I've given out all my Oak Street ones. You can park on State so that we could distribute them. I live I live just above uh State. No, um Main Street School parking passes. Live up in the Heights. So, but it's

we it's people are going to park as close as they possibly can, right? So, if we say you can't go on Cascade, they're going to park on Oak. we say you can't go on Oak, can't go on Cascade, they're going to go on State, they're not going to go to Seventh, they're not or whatever, right? So, I I think we just have to keep that in mind. So, is there a way for us to maybe limit the amount that could be used per day, um make that equitable for the hotels, limit them to certain amounts of streets, that that sort of thing. I know that's a little bit more implementation, but I think that practice works.

Like my parking pass is very clear where I can't park. Like I can park for free. I mean I've already paid but but not on oh Cascade State first to stick. Like there's a core and I'm not in it. And that seems like a very logical restriction to place on this. That's no work. That's just saying make it like pass X. We already own we already operate. Like that seems so simple. Thank you Amanda.

I can see that. But I also think that if they run out of passes that are closed, like that's not going to make the hotel people staying there, park further away, they might just use the app. Like I don't think that really fixes the problem of people in the hotel parking downtown, like having two per cascade or whatever, you know, like they'll just park and use the app instead of using the hotel pass. I I mean I would think I would also say I cannot guarantee that if they have an Oak Street pass they can find a parking spot on Oak Street. Right. Right. It doesn't guarantee you a spot. There might be lots of spots on another street but you can't use your pass there. Seems a little bit yeah complicated. I don't know how effective it would actually be in free. Yeah.

Obviously that says no easy solution. If there was I could have obviously managed it. Uh I but I guess I can take all of the feedback that I heard. I Katie Kadl is online and has been listening to this conversation. I can connect with her. I can try to put together a meeting with the lodgers and try to bring you uh some negotiated settlement or agreement for uh an interim solution. Is that what I'm hearing? Till you can study this more in depth. I mean this is there's never going to be a clear-cut easy answer to this. And so uh I will try my best to bring you something that uh at least addresses the majority of the concerns.

Thank you Abigail. or saying things. Um I I really like I think it was a letter from Miranda maybe that um mentioned maybe more like 15 minute spots quick in and out which like if we can do that then that would also I don't know if that's too big to do as an interim or if it's manageable as an interim but I think that would be a really good solution that way people can park on each block and go in and out drop off their taxes or whatever

that would be any fundamental change to your parking strategy at this time I I you know if you wanted to put one in front of that particular business uh we could do the do that but uh I would say before you create a brand new parking structure as well as that has big implications for your app which only allows one hour minimum parking so I would I would just recommend studying that yeah it wouldn't be an app that would be like the loading zone or whatever we have m we have multiple fascinating things too tonight so if we could move on. Anna, one last question. Do we So, you have to pay for an hour and is it difficult to change the app so that you could only have 20-minute increments? Like, and

actually when you say you change it to be a minimum of an hour because it used to uh the processing charge that we were uh incurring was actually uh right at or more than what people were actually paying for parking. So, we were operating at a loss for the shorter term parking spots. Um, the other thing I just want to say really quickly was I really appreciate that folks um provided their input on this and I love it when people give us ideas and solutions as opposed to just complaining about problems. So, thank you very much for um you know being willing to participate in giving good ideas. Thank you. Promise this is actually quick. Have we ever looked at this um since it was implemented? This is the first time we're revisiting. Yeah,

I don't know that it's addressed in the 2019 study. So okay as far as I know it has not been studied as it had not really been used. Cool. I don't think that painoint had been there before. So if I can summarize one more time I am hearing we don't want to eliminate it. We don't want to keep it as it is. Abigail find some magical solution that we can use as an interim until we can study this at a later date and that you promise to fund that update. Yes. In the next budget and we will uh take another look at what that number might need to be based on uh this conversation and possibly another conversation you have later today. Yes.

Wait, I don't I don't want to promise to fund an update necessarily. I think we should look at what we have before we put more money into it. I just I'd like I I what I'd like to see is a more comp like give us a chance to read through the study. Give us an idea and all the relevant documentation and then like you said there was an update maybe I think I saw it on the website in like 2022. Um but I like a better summary of here's what happened. here's what the study says, here's what the update is was in 2022, like before we say, "Yeah, let's drop another 15,000 or whatever on it." I just I feel like we we spend a lot of money on studies and then don't do anything with them. So, good point, Anna. How do people feel about that point Anna made?

I think we all had mentioned that. Yes. That How do folks feel about that? I see a lot of non nonfeedback. People okay with that? Thank you. Sure. I'm down to not spend money. Yeah. and that I don't think we're asking let's do a fullblown on study on this. Let's look at the three points on page 24 of our packet. Those are the ones that we can look at now. The uh an update or specific part to a study. Maybe that could be later down the road a longer term solution. But for sure, let's focus on the three items that are in here sooner rather than later. Doug,

I don't think that you should come up with a magical solution. I think sometimes we come up, we come here, we've all reviewed things, we brainstorm, we can't come to a decision. I think we should all go back to the drawing board and come back to the next meeting and say, I've thought a little bit more about this. I like what councelor Cavaleri said. I like what councelor Gakei said. And everybody here, this is what I think we should do, right? Well, we got rid of two. We only got one left. For those who are interested, I discovered over the winter by accident and I went to Abigail and she's like, "Really?" And we looked into it. There has been dramatic change in the parking enforcement at the waterfront. I have a whole photo montage of signage that has gone up over the winter. I'm so interested to see how that shakes out this winter, this summer. What did you say, Aan?

I said that parking change is not city initiating, right? Not on our land, on everybody else's land. Everybody else's land is making changes and collecting money and saying do this and saying thank you. And it's quite dramatic down there. So, I fully expect it to be very high energy up here as well. Moving on, Dustin What happened?

Right along in the downtown parking theme. At the request of council, uh I prepared for you a little historical update on the P and Lou program. Uh you all had asked that we return uh with this for for some discussion uh to help kickstart the discussion. I prepared we're talking about tiny houses. Excuse me. Also you but we could go into tiny house then. Okay, good. Thank Also, at the request of council, yeah, uh we

we've uh prepared uh a short analysis of RV parking and tiny home parking. Um there was a request to have this discussed before council as an option uh in your housing strategy. Um really, I'd put together a couple things from your packet from the two municipalities that manage uh and do this practice currently. One of them is city of Portland which allows um RV basically parking for with no tenure limits. And then the city of Springfield which currently has a temporary program with no end limit. I believe that was in response to might have been Senate Bill or House Bill 2098 which was a response to the Santium fire uh lost about 2,000 homes in southern Oregon. the state required some of the cities to um to allow for some temporary provisions um in response to that fire for temporary dwellings. Uh Springfield prepared an ordinance and how it would use campers, RVs, trailers for housing without limit. Currently, the city has uh some limitations on how long you can be in an RV. Some locations as a city is no overnight allowance. uh by permit I believe Jen there's 10 night allowance in other parts of the city that allowed you to stay. So really the c the city is has been for a very long time about a 10day max stay in an RV within certain parts of town. Other than that it does

way or on private uh private property.

Uh your parking in the rightway really manages that. Now, you you had that u spirited discussion on how long you could be in the rightway that really addressed some of the overnight stays um with your with your hourly approach. So, uh this was asked by you. No end or direction. Um but something we prepared for your your discussion. I'm gonna kick it off in Glattus. Um my the way this goes in my brain and most people I talk to is how come we don't allow tiny houses? Well, it turns out tiny houses are the same like definitionally as an RV. Oh, that doesn't feel quite the same. Glattus,

thank you. Uh, I would support moving forward with some sort of code amendment. This is a lowcost way. This is a way to diversify some housing. Um, as we know that is a a challenge and that it does so without some of these major infrastructure investments. I appreciate the two examples that were given to us. Uh I had an opportunity to go to a work event out in Tiluk County where they have uh tiny home like mobile parks where they are they stay in that place but everything like the water, the sewer, the electricity, there's very specific rules. Uh actually looked at the code out there. Um, so would support a lot of what already exists like the requirements for Springfield, maybe even beefing up some of the language like in the helpful safety tips for the city of Portland, making those more of um requirements as opposed to helpful safety tips. But really appreciate having this discussion and I look forward to I have many more comments but I will reserve those for now and give my peers an opportunity to weigh in.

Doug Doug and then Grant. Thank you. Um how much time and capacity would this take versus your other workload that you have? something of this magnitude. If you're going to go on private property, it should be in a work plan due to engagement. So, I I I don't have any spots on the work plan right now. Um, how much

I haven't even scoped it. I haven't even scoped what it would be. It would be a massive amendment because it could impact every property. I would put it on par with the leg. It's a legislative process. So, it also depends on how much scope you want. Do you want me to do it in a vacuum? I could write it up in a month. You want me to talk to outside agencies, public works department, residents, business owners? That it depends. Depends on how ambitious you want to be about it. So it would push you you're saying it would push theoretically everything else on our schedule back. I I would have to make I would have to make room in in the work plan and some I would have to bump something. Okay,

Doug and then Glattus. So, yeah, I I think through our discussions, but you know, just to reiterate, we have no way to delineate or make make a difference of uh this a tiny home is this and a RV is that. Correct.

Yeah. Really, they're treated the same way. Um a a tiny home on wheels and an RV, they're really a similar creature. uh when it comes to this type of analysis um an a different than an ADU which we do now and we allow on lots and ADU is a stickuilt building it's allowed on every single dwelling household uh by code by right uh but it's built to the building code it's located and it's fixed permanently that is that's permissive these are we these are all wheeled structures so that that's the really the difference between the two and

and I think the the other difference that I'm concerned about that curious to learn a little bit more about what councelor Rivera is saying is if we were to allow them, I'd like them to be safe, right? So, how like what what do we how can we do that, right? Um I know a lot of tiny, you know, tiny homes, little little office sheds that people build and everything are like definitely not up to code. Uh fire fire damage, you know, they're not framed correctly that that would have the same safety standards as as a dwelling would be. Uh that sort of thing. So, I'm not saying you need to do this study today or not. I think that's a different discussion. But I I think that kind of thing that that Glass was saying about, you know, can we can we work that into the code? Is that can we legally work that into the code? Um is is is of interest.

Um Oh, I lost my train of thought. So, help me understand h would this not align with the mobile home park preservation that we already have? like help me understand how this would be a completely separate item.

It's different. Um this is very much different and what we prepared or what kind of what we brought for discussion is not related to mobile home parks. So a mobile home park, manufactured home park, uh campground are really kind of different animals. Um that is that's something all all to its own. Um that is incorporated into the code right now and some of the things we're working on. This would be allowing a tiny home or RV to be used as if it's not a manufactured home, it's not a mobile home per se, to be anchored um that is manufactured in a uh in a facility that is pre-inspected by the state and has the credentials of a safe dwelling unit. This is a mobile vehicle. So, that's that's where the two become kind of separated. So, the use of

I thought a mobile home was a mobile vehicle as well. Well, I mean, just because I was looking at the code for Springfield, I looked at the code for Tillamok, and I looked at the code that you sent us from Portland and and they have that like one RV home uh in a primary dwelling unit. It has to be connected to water, sewer, and electrical. Like, it's really specific like no generators, no holding tax, tanks. Um there can be no extension, any sort of permanent structures. You can't build a little garage next to it. This is also included in like a cottage style housing which aligns with our middle housing code. There's like fee structure, uh, utility, like it's all really clearly laid out. So, I I I'm still having a hard time understanding how this would be completely different than a mobile home park that has really similar like structure.

RB tiny home separate from what would be considered a mobile home or a manufactured dwelling. So the that that's really the the structures themselves start to become two different classes if you will. I think like a manufactured home has like significant fire safety built into it. Like they have code walls where it won't like burn the bedroom to the bathroom in seven seconds. Like I think they're built to a very different standard. I could be wrong, but that's what I believe. Yeah. I don't Yeah. Uh, Anna,

so if I can jump in here for a second because Dustin, I think I think I'm When I read through this, um, what you presented to us was how an individual property owner might be able to have an RV or um or a camper or something or a tin a tiny mobile or a tiny house on wheels on their property in addition to their primary residence. Um, so and what I hear you saying and what maybe what they have in Telmuk is more like a park and so the infrastructure is already in the ground in the park. People can wheel their homes in and plug in and stay there for an extended period of time. What I'm concerned about with this is um you know is folks getting these cute little campers, parking them at their house where they already have an ADU, they have a um you know they have their primary primary residence and then it's being rented as a short-term rental on top of that or something. What I what I think is being presented here is isn't about supplementing our affordable housing. It's about having residential lots. And that was one of my questions is, you know, I kind of remember this idea being presented of, hey, can we talk about this a little bit more? But it's about like me rolling into town and saying, "Glattis, you have a lovely home with a yard. Can I park my RV here and stay for a month and while I'm looking for housing in in Hood River?" or you know so it's not really uh I I don't think this really addresses our overarching problem of how do we have affordable housing if we wanted to or attainable housing if we wanted to and had the availability of of property where we could have more parks or um campgrounds or whatever and and people could bring their tiny homes and be allowed to stay there longer or develop um neighborhoods or communities that are

mobile home part like tiny house on wheels park kind of communities. Maybe that's an option. But I kind of remember Amanda, maybe you had brought like, "Hey, can we talk about this a little bit more?" And I was just hoping for some context of what are we talking about?

Um, yeah, I brought it up because somebody brought it to me that they have a tiny house on wheels and they don't have a place to live in their tiny house on wheels. It's because they can't legally park it anywhere. So, you know, I think as far as the short-term rental thing goes, we can say that that's not allowed. I think that was one of the other cities did that. Um, so, you know, it's like somebody has space for a tiny house to be there. That person now has housing and can live in Hood River because they already have this house. They just don't have a place to put it. And so, that's where it comes from. And I think it's worthwhile. Um, I think we could write code to like make it safe and um, and if it's something that we need to like put on the next work plan, that's fine. I mean, I, you know, we're going to be working on that at the end of the year, I guess. So, um, you know, it's not like it has to happen right now, but I would like to pursue it and keep keep it going personally.

Doug and then Glattus. Yeah. And I think Amanda, the way that I think about this is like the people I know that own tiny homes in this area, uh, that are not in the city of Hood River, like they're not like picking up and moving all the time, right? So like, you know, I think when we were talking about this about what makes it, you know, a tiny home versus an RV, it's like, can you take the wheels off? I think a lot of those people would take the wheels off, you know what I mean? Um, so it's more about like I have an R, and correct me if I'm wrong, I have an R3 lot. I've got an extra yard over there, you know? um instead of building an ADU, could it be a tiny home? Is it that sort of thing?

So, I think I think that's a little that's why it's a little different. It's more about infill of residential and and like think of it as like a smaller ADU is what I think that the the point I I I hope. Yeah.

Yeah. Phase one RVs can be allowed tiny homes in someone's primary dwelling. there's all sorts of restrictions and explicitly states that you cannot have this as a short-term rental which closes that loophole on subleting. Um, and then as we think about the mobile home mobile home park preservation as a longer conversation, could we envision where we have a plot of land that's very specific to where more tiny homes are parked? like first one being folks are already doing it now. So I think like let's make it okay. Let's make sure there's a lot of safety specific uh regulations around that and that there is some sort of like permitting ticket so that we understand where these RVs or tiny homes are parked and that there is a fee some you know similar to what we already have in place for others. So uh just to help frame conversation back to how do we differentiate these two RV and tiny homes are in the vehicle category. So living in your vehicle now it's a large vehicle and you know with all the accuchments of or some of the accutrants your manufactured and mobile are are in the housing stock. Um, sounds like you're interested in the code of we will do manufact we have to do manufacturing and mobile home that's already in our mustdo list because we uh well one it's in the charter and in the scope of the work you told us to do. Second we need to reconcile this with updates in state law to get lawful. So that's in place. There are also across the United States campgrounds KOA campground that's a long-term campground. who see larger vehicles, they have power pedestals, they have those features and that very well could be incorporated in the code as well as a as some sort of project that provides kind of orchestrated and

phase spaces spaces for these type of uses. Um that absolutely could be a part of the the project as well without having it become a living vehicle your RV on on a lot. So we we have a whole lot of runway to do things. Some of them have to be done, but certainly this is your discussion and direction. So, we're just trying to help facilitate your your options. One of you, too. I don't know.

And we were saying tiny because I think we've said tiny houses a few times, but tiny houses on wheels specifically, right? Because we because a tiny house that is has like a, you know, a foundation that's essentially an ADU, right? If if it's built to building code, yeah, it's an ADU. Yeah. Anchor anchored to the ground. You know, even even manufactured housing that is has building code stamps and certificates that are anchored like that type of modular pre-fabricated construction is is permitted within the city as well by right. Yeah. Um by law, by state law already.

Yeah. Um, I'm generally supportive of any way that we can get more housing in this community. Is this, you know, the kind of what housing that I want for people? No, not necessarily. Um, but, you know, I'm in a kind of leave no stone unturned uh, mindset in terms of what can we do. I am I I do wonder a little bit about like you know um is there a lot of demand for this? You know are we hearing um this a lot from people you know looking to uh host RVs or you know people looking to park their tiny houses on wheels somewhere. I I don't I don't know. Um, but and I also just want to be, you know, respectful of staff time. I'm kind of, you know, getting a sense throughout this, uh, you know, maybe the last few meetings that there's a lot, uh, on staff's plate right now. We're trying to do a lot of things. Um, and so this is definitely something that I, you know, would be interested in pursuing in terms of a work plan down the road, which I, I know that people aren't necessarily insinuating that this has had to be done now. It's sometimes feels that way when something's like on the agenda for, you know, a meeting tonight. Um but uh again I'll just say that anything that we can do to alleviate the burden that people have in this community in terms of uh attaining housing um I think is worthy of of looking into. So um yeah I would definitely like to well not me as you guys are doing it

mainly but dive into this at some point. um that staff feels they have the ability to take this on. Anna, and then me.

Um I agree with that. I think that that it is I think we should try to be as creative as we possibly can in in figuring out a way to make housing more attainable within our community. Um what isn't making sense to me is um you know I can appreciate that a tiny home on wheels or an RV is less expensive than a property um you know a stickuilt home but we're not thinking of I'm worried that we're not thinking about the bigger picture of um tax lots and property law and you know if if you have a neighbor that has an empty lot next to them and all of a sudden they're saying come park your tiny homes here and we'll have some kind kind of a a like, you know, um a side hustle business of I'm going to do short-term lease or like long-term leases with somebody who owns a tiny home or they can just come and park their tiny home here or they can live in their RV here. Like the the examples that you gave us are temporary. Like I I feel bad for somebody that might have invested in a tiny home on wheels and now they don't have a place to park it, but they're they still need to buy a parcel of property or come up with an arrangement with somebody to be able to put it there because like I don't I don't know that our you know we do like somebody else said about envisioning a community of um you know we we have homes and then all these little tiny homes stuck in between like I think we need to be thoughtful about this and how it could work. But I'm I also think we we need to be creative in how we can come up with attainable housing.

Uh real quick to that point, a couple of those concerns were addressing the examples given. One, not allowing STRs and two I think specifically it said that they had to be on developed lots. So you couldn't like have an empty plot of land and put a tiny house on wheels on it. At least in terms of the examples that were given here, like there was uh also in terms of RVs, it said like again, these are just examples, not necessarily what we would do, but um you know, they had to be either parked in a driveway or behind the facade, the front facing facade of of the house. So definitely like hear that. And I I feel like some of those concerns are accounted for in in what's been presented to us in the packet.

The two things I can imagine people getting cranky about are just what you mentioned at the end there, Ben, is that when suddenly your neighbor pulls a a camper into the driveway right next to your driveway and now there's somebody living there like long term, like I don't think people are going to universally love that. and the like life safety like smoking in bed and the whole thing goes because it doesn't have you know asbestous that's not what we use but whatever Pusqualian lock you guys know like the fire safety like built to standard is a real issue I think Glattus

that piece is in there just to I hear you and agree um but there is something really specific to like carbon monoxide and fire alarms and all that that the city of Portland already includes uh I can't find it right now, but I do know that that's already in there.

Doug, and ju just to be clear, like I think the reason we're discussing this at all is uh constructing an ADU in the city of Hood River right now is not like a $100,000, guys. Right. It's a lot more than that, right? So, it's it's it's because Yeah. Yeah, I spoke to somebody the other day that's a developer in town that put on an addition to a house that that was like $300,000 to an for an addition that was like 300 ft. So, uh, construction costs are insane. People can't find places to live. Like to Ben's point, like yeah, no stone unturned. I think I think Glattus is kind of in the same boat there. But like to Amanda's point, Dustin's point, like maybe this is something to be discussed for a work plan sort of thing and it probably would take a lot of time. But um we'd have to consider that as we consider things additionally on the work plan. But this is why we're trying to be creative here. It's hard out there.

Yeah. I mean all of that and that we know it's already taking place. We know that there are already RVs parked at someone's house already because we know that the pricing for housing is so expensive that that's sometimes people's best option that they have, especially when they're just transitioning to to Hood River, that that might be the only um opportunity that they have for housing. So, I think it's already here. Let's take advantage and put more restrictions about it. It doesn't necessarily have to be today or tomorrow or next month. uh but that we should absolutely have more of this conversation into our work plan and how does this can this does this tie into our mobile home park preservation

yeah and I mean and I suppose the last thing it's uh you know one of the elements that I think was written on here is like well we need to you know get in touch with you know fire and utilities and talk to them and maybe after talking to them we decide well no this is not maybe a good idea to do like I you know philosophically I am in favor of doing this because of the issues insane housing issues in this community but I also realize that there are some like really unique concerns about this and you know I don't want to say yes 100% we need to have this all all done like I definitely want to explore to see more about what are the potential, you know, issues that we need to be concerned about.

I think we have substantial agreement on this. I know that you didn't come with a motion, but I would encourage someone to make a motion and see if we can get a majority in favor of something specific. Anna,

I don't have a motion figured out yet, but I had one more a couple more discussion points to make. And one is I appreciate what Glattis said about this is already happening and I think enforcement is an issue um because nobody wants to turn in their neighbors about stuff like and it is kind of happening. And the other thought I had was um oh is it um oh lower hanging fruit of yes, we're all in agreement that construction costs and the ability to build housing and afford housing in our community is a real issue. But maybe a lowerhanging fruit is, you know, we're already doing the go the code update and hopefully we can have some more conversations with builders of how can we help make the cost of construction so that our housing costs aren't so outrageous because I would much rather try to figure out how we can help facilitate more housing building being built here than saying, "Hey everybody, we're going to just let folks live in their cars for a while because we just can't figure out how to make it more realistic for people to purchase homes here. So, I I I wish we could do more work on that.

I would say it's not an eitheror proposition necessarily. I 100% agree with you. And like I said, it's like this is, you know, ideally not the housing that uh you know, I think we're necessarily looking for. And I'm sure probably a decent amount of people that might be living in these situations probably don't want that as well. But, you know, again, uh, anything that we can do, I'm down to look into, have staff look into. They're the ones doing the work.

Yes, to all of that. And that, you know, there's RVs and then I've seen tiny homes that are beautiful, like marble, like luxurious. And some of these companies are based out of Portland, right? I know that for MCAC we were working with the community college for some of tiny homes, right? So I think there may be this assumption of of what it could look like and they're they're really broad and it's not just some people choose this lifestyle like I only want to live with X amount of you know things and I don't want to have property. I don't want to have all of that. So I think that's another piece to look into. But um as far as a motion, I would direct staff to continue looking at a possible code amendment that's modeled after Portland incorporating the Springfield registration framework, structural safety, noise enforcement like fee structure, and that you come back and give us some different options that we can do in the interim and maybe some items that we do add to a larger work plan uh to get back to how do we I don't know maybe it's builders that are building these beautiful tiny homes moving forward.

Moved by Rivera. Second second by Gakei. Further discussion Amanda and then Doug. I just want to kind of reiterate what um councelor just said like some people choose this life. It's not like uh I don't think it's something to be ashamed of or like you know bad. It's like this is what some people want and I think we should be able to support that. Um for those people who choose this and you know that's all done.

Um I I'm trying to figure out how this motion does or does not add to Dustin's plate. Like I I heard Council Rivera say you know like there will be some maybe some stuff that you'd suggest for a work plan etc. Um, so I'd vote for it if Justin was like, "Hey, I I could take a look at some of these things. I think that this will be in the development code audit. I think we could roll this in. All this other stuff I think should be you guys are dot voting in December." And if someone wants to to do that. So, as long as you're taking that as the direction from that motion, I'm happy to.

If I could weigh in, I just want to note that a project like this really requires some robust community engagement beyond what has been done in the development code uh update cleanup. Uh so I would recommend that this be a separate project if you choose to pursue it rather than uh being rolled into the project that has already had it uh has had some substantial um public engagement. It just it feels very different because it's a um I think it talks about neighbors and neighborhoods and residents where the development code update has really been focused more on people who use the code. Sorry, Dustin. Go ahead if you want to say more or disagree with that.

Dustin and then Anna. Dustin, you're you're on red up there. Anna, Grant, a question about the motion. Is this to have direct staff to start taking actions right now?

Yeah. Look at what your options are. Give us feedback of this is what we could do now. This is what we could do later. this is what's going to require dot voting in a council work plan at the beginning of the year. Like I'm not trying to add more work to the your plate, but I think there's already a lot that other cities are doing around this that we don't necessarily have to reinvent the wheel on it and that you could start from there as opposed to something brand new.

So what are we asking staff to do? If we're not asking staff to do anything now, then what are we asking them to do? I was really clear that we direct staff to look at where we could amend code that is modeled after Portland that incorporating the Springfield registration framework that you add uh safety components that we all discussed like carbon monoxide, fire alarms, um a fee structure like help us understand what all of that would look like. So that that is something we could talk about potentially having and enforcing here in the city because we know that folks are already parking their I RVs in someone's property,

but and and not doing this work now but doing it when I don't understand his workload capacity. And so I'm saying look at these options and give us a timeline of when we can have better discussion or more direction of when could we actually implement this. Is this something that gets implemented at the end of the year at the beginning of next year for example because I don't understand everything on his workplate and that's that's why I asked the question earlier. That's it.

Again I think what would be appropriate would be to scope a project. Again, the idea of modeling a a code set after this, that's that's one thing. It's very different to have community engagement in a legislative process to talk to other people. So, I could manu like as mentioned, there's other cities that have these rules. Are they the rules that you want? Are the cities your constituents? Are they the rules that they want? And so, that that's a big difference though. And as I mentioned, that was the scope of is this project writing a rule set? Is this project in community engagement? Those are very different creatures when it comes to the lift on us and the timing. So,

so is is it I'm sorry. Go ahead. So, so is it like you're you're like we want to try to understand from Dustin what would this level of effort look like kind of get our heads together on it then decide hey that is something we want to do right now or then now that we know all this information we can go into a work plan session and say we have an idea of what this project looks like this is how it would be scope based on what Justin said it's going to take roughly x amount of months or hours or workload and is is that that the context that Yeah. So, like I'm I'm in favor of voting for something like that for you to just give us a an idea of what this project looks like, right? Versus right here um uh just asking you to say what what's it going to take, right? You know, so like if you can if you like if it's something where you spend a few hours or whatever to say council, this is what I think this project would have to look like. It would be x amount of hours and this amount of effort. I'd be in favor of that versus any anything further than that I think is adding to your plate significantly. I'll second.

Are you clear what the motion means? Is is is directing you all to do?

I think I understood the motion, but I'm gonna ask for permission to like come back to you with a scope of what we think this is, what we think we heard today and come back. I also think uh I can detour for just a second. Um, a lot has been added to our plates in the last couple months and maybe we need to take a pause and actually do some dot voting of like the current status of all of the projects on your work plan plus the projects that have been added recently to get a sense of where this lies with other projects. Feeling a little bit intimidated by the workload right now. Um, so I don't know how Dustin feels about that, but I think it need this project would need to compete with other projects for uh priority. I think that was one of our goals today was to hear how this fits in your priority list with the existing projects. Glass

I think that's an excellent suggestion and I I do know that we are trying to assess what has been close to being wrapped up in our work plan to understand sounds like some of this work could be new work or new items that are added to a new work plan or an updated work plan. So, I I really appreciate the suggestion of understanding what's ready to come off the work plan so that we can figure out what could be added. I actually heard the motion as pretty clear, meaning not bump anything off the list. It wasn't jump to the top, it's jump to the bottom. That's what I I heard. When there's time, here's what we'd like. That's

I thought I heard add immediate things that we can easily do using Portland and Springfield as a model uh and the safety pieces and then do the other pieces later. I apologize if I thank you for the clarification if I got that wrong.

The intention is that we already know this exists in other local cities and so I don't necessarily think it would be having to send Dustin to start from scratch more of like there's already a model that exists here locally or close by. Could you start from there? Don't bump what you have, but just how much work time do you think this would be? And that you tell us, okay, this is not something we could add by the end of the year, but definitely something for 27, for example. Hannah,

I really appreciate what you said, Dustin, about um intensive public engagement and finding out from our constituents here how they would see this working in our community. So, um I would be okay with the scope of of um like scoping it and telling us how it fits in, but I also like to your current workload, but I also think it's really important that you know, while we have some good um kind of ideas from other communities about what's working for them, I think we need to talk to our community and find out what they're what they're open to and what they think because I think that that's that's going to be really critical. I'm pondering. Part of me feels like we should, that was an excellent discussion. Part of me feels like we we I can I mean, you guys are elected counselors. Take a vote and see who's in favor. Part of me feels like we should maybe shorten up the motion a little bit. I don't think I heard the word scoping until Dustin said it. And that may be more in the target that people want. I don't know. So, those are my thoughts. Uh, I could call the question.

Well, I think we have a motion on the floor. So, maybe let that motion fail and then we can come up with a new motion that directs Dustin to scope this out. Exactly. So, without Grant, there was a motion and a second. So, the motion We have a motion on the on the floor. We have a motion. So, without further I call the question. All in favor of the motion opposed. I I chair votes nay. Motion pass. Motion fails. Okay, great. If anyone I appreciate Glattus bravely making a motion. Good work. Anybody want to take another swing? It's you know big leagues up here.

I wasn't I wasn't necessarily going to make a motion. I was just going to that I think we're all ideologically in agreement that we want to do this work. It's just a matter of the timing and when we're going to get it done. I think we're all in general agreement that we're going to if assuming we're all going to be around or what who whoever is going to be on council at some point in the future where uh the intent or idea is to add it to the future work plan. Um so if anything um we could theoretically make a motion to make a note for staff to have it on the list for future work plan.

Yeah. And like with context, right? like you know this is what that I'll make a motion uh I I move that we direct staff to give us uh a short summary on what the scope of work would look like for for us to implement uh a program similar to the the cities that that councelor Rivera has has listed and uh present that to us at the work plan session so that we may use that information to decide if whether or not we'd like to have it on that two-year work plan. Moved by Stpina.

I'll second. Second by Rivera. Again, Dustin and Abigail, does this give you direction about what we're asking for? Great. You're on red. Thank you. Uh, any further discussion? All in favor? I I Yes. Opposed. Chair votes eye. Motion passes. Thank you. Now without in

much like the leap year this uh topic comes back uh downtown parking really more of a perennial uh discussion point but fianl uh is one that based on some of our math comes back about every four years to seven depending on on the state of the economy and interested parties. Um, prior to 2006, the first 800,000 plus square feet of downtown development, um, both commercial residential was developed without the requirements for parking. Uh, some of that was because the Ford experiment was yet to be proven. Uh but yet what you have is is a largely historical downtown built around um really alternative modes and in a traditional uh central business district style. Come 2006, um, pressures with growth, pressures with parking, uh, the city did its first downtown parking study and started to analyze what, uh, future strategies would be for supply, demand, usage. Uh, within that, the concept of fee and loo came about. um you see actually the first time that the city requires businesses, developments, redevelopments to provide minimum amounts of parking and in combination of that requirement having an inloo option uh to satisfy that parking requirement. So, um, for those watching at home, um, parking not provided by these businesses or developments, redevelopments, um, within downtown and later the Heights and Waterfront that was not satisfied in the traditional or suburbanized parking lot, uh, on off- streetet parking could be satisfied by paying a contribution uh, and that was in lie of parking. So, um, over time between 2006 and 2010, uh, staff starts to recognize and

council recognizes that no one is participating in this program, that the amount, uh, was not necessarily, uh, matching up with the market request. And uh therefore the that amount is adjusted um at that time to help stimulate some economic development and help move uh really some of the commercial businesses downtown into a better position fee and Lou which was about $18,000 at the time uh for residential and commercial uh downtown has dropped to $1,000 per space u for your for your commercial operations left at $18,000 for the residential uh uses. Fast forward another seven years, a large um or it's large a more ambitious high-profile project is promoted or floated in downtown. That developer speaks to council and say the inloo parking requirement for a residential is is really a costiller here. Um it will not allow us to do our project. You provide no parking. Uh we will pay x amount of dollars. Um, this is a this is an obstacle to residential development. Uh, in the meantime, in the background, Dr. the late great Bob Carneahan, owner of the Hood River or Wakoma Hotel, is is lobbying and and pleading his case, saying, "I have a historic hotel. It's on the historic register. I will owe you $800,000 day one before I ever open the door of this building. I cannot get a buyer to purchase this thing. and I will I will demo this historic landmark before likely I will be able to ever build upon it. We have to give him acknowledge his his participation from from 2006 to to probably the day he sold it. Um so in that in mind is generated not only to provide options for parking but to really hold together some of that

framework of downtown. Um downtown is not characterized by parking spaces. Um these businesses were you know have value cultural value some of them in your comp plan uh not to be demoed uh because they could not be reused yet here we are. So uh fast forward to 2017 this council has asked and debates for three months at the deis what do we do with this? Um it comes up and I believe I I included this in your packet. The the compromise of the first twothirds of required parking would be $20,000. The last one-third thereafter would be $2,000 per space. However, coming out of that, I couldn't tell you how many parking spaces were required. Fast forward two years, another eight-month study to really update the downtown parking analysis, public outreach, a subgroup of property owners. We bring back a 30-point strategy and business plan for downtown parking that includes an updated fee and loo schedule, a commentary on the cost and benefits. Uh a whole list of things regarding the management of parking downtown. It's not a parking garage study. That's items 29 to 31. What can you do to deal with your parking? How to best manage your your parking? Best management practices from subject matter expert. and we have provided an update on that. You now have uh actually a budgeted item to provide a review and light update of that study, an analysis of how things have gone. Um what has changed since 2019. Uh a lot has changed in the field of apps and technology. And if you want to read the background of this great piece of work, you can look up Hood River downtown parking study. There is a page on your website that has the entire study, all

the notes, every white paper produced, as well as a link to a Facebook page that I can guarantee has not been updated probably since 2020. So, uh, there you have it. U, that's the fianl as we are today. Currently today, downtown, um, fenlue was adjusted to $3,000 of space. There was specific interim condition that was applied until the city decided or the urban renewal agency depending on who wanted to take that move to start evaluating future supply build into its funding package. uh whether that was a combination of uh local improvement district, user fees, feocal improvement district, business district, whatever it was, it would be considered as a part of the overall component, not a standalone financing mechanism, which is identified in the plan, uh would be a flawed strategy. So, here we are. Interim conditions 2029 fees have been generated. uh first 15 years roughly got you about $15,000 in total. Um since that time I believe we're up to about $290,000 since that adjustment. So people are stick starting to take advantage of it. Businesses like Pine Street, you've heard from the light well, um Brimstone Buildering, uh Bouldering, excuse me, um

Working Hands,

Working Hands. There's a number of small businesses within your community uh that have taken advantage of this program to satisfy their parking. Bowden restaurant is another one across the street uh have all utilized this program to help participate in your parking program. So being used requested us to bring it back to discuss. Happy to take any comments, take some direction. Um your the floor is meeting is yours. The way I think of it is we got that $20 and something thousand dollars and those six cool businesses that that Dustin mentioned. I sat here for decades with Mr. Carneahan feeling for him like he has this beautiful building but he was not going to put parking in. We changed the rules and some other brilliant people came and now we have the hotel. I don't think we're gonna anytime soon within Luffy's fund the parking structure which last I heard a decade ago was $20,000 of space or some you know un unaffordable number but it was locked up and then it was a little less locked up. Now in my opinion we don't need to uh to uh prime the pump anymore. I think we need to be pretty defensive about our parking availability. So, I'd be in favor of uh coming up with a with a with a change.

Anna, um in our proposed budget is just so I I'd like to understand. So, um, to the upcoming proposed study, how much are we budgeting for that for the update of this $35,000 for Rick Williams consultant? Before two weeks ago, that did not include an update to FE and Lou. So, depending on where you guys want to go, we are going to need to update our ask to for for to make sure our scope matches up to what you want. Go ahead. Can you help me understand why not vlu wasn't added to the scope?

Really we were looking it wasn't an issue that you all were asking for. Uh we were looking for more of a commentary on the strategies the date and the app. I think that was one thing that we heard from the outside commentary was when we had Duncan meters and the issue was plugging the meter uh physically going out and moving uh I don't think that was necessarily fully appreciated with the app and I think that's one of the things and some of the strategies that we've evaluated saying okay does the the use of the technology that we've adopted the strategies the um have they started making some some nroads and and are There unintended consequences of this technology we have now e-meter plugging. Do you want to change it?

Ben and then Anna. Oh sh just a minute ago.

Um uh I guess I may want to put somebody on the spot here, but um you know it was mentioned that council you know wanted this uh you know uh to be revisited. I was not one of the individuals that requested this to be revisited. So I guess I would like to know if if one of the counselors who had mentioned this would discuss about like what exactly the reason is for revisiting it and I guess what I guess why like what we would what that individual would like to see out of it because I you know reading through this having not been on council at that time um I kind of got a sense of almost that like in some ways this isn't isn't really pleasing anybody. It seems like this is a obviously this has been going back and forth for for 20 years and we've had it low and we've had it high and we've had it middle and um I am I suppose a little bit kind of not quite sure how I feel about it and would like a little bit Mary you're nodding. Um so

I'm eager to say yeah go for it. You're you've got that tenure.

There's two fantastic metaphors I think relevant. One is the Federal Reserve like is supposed to take away the punch bowl just as the party gets going fun. Um I think that we have at times been completely uh unable to redevelop our downtown because the fee was too high. Now I think it might be a little too low. The other is the two old ladies at the resort and you say the food here is terrible and the other one says I know in such small portions right like nobody wants to pay for parking. Everyone wants there to be park. The only thing worse than having to like not find a spot is reaching in your pocket and paying the 75 cents. So, it's it's super complicated. I don't think the city has all the role. I don't think the city has no role. But, as I was monitoring the conversations about the Marriott, clearly a big concern was, "Oh my god, if we have another hotel downtown, there'll be no parking." They weren't totally wrong. So, I think being a little less punchbully about buying your way out of a parking obligation for a cheap price would be a good idea. Anna,

um, this is so directly tied to our previous conversation about the parking passes and everything. What it really makes me think is probably that the best way to do this would be a work session like a separate hey let's get together and sit down and talk for a couple of hours about the holistic approach and I feel like um we got really good input from our public about looking at this holistically and not just thinking about the you know just the parking in loo I think um back to what we were talking about affordable housing too of like development is not happening for multiple reasons. It's not because of the parking and loot costs. Like we need to figure out really what is the hurdles to us um you know having healthy vibrant businesses and places to live in our community. And um I think that you know if we're solely focused on just parking in loo fees we're missing the bigger picture of you know what is it that we should be looking at and I think that this is a a work session conversation where you know we invite the public to come in and give us their thoughts on this and we talk to visit Hood River and we you know we don't have oh sorry just the three minute um time frame of people being able to participate in the conversation. Um, I had one other thought about this. Um, but I can't remember what it is now.

Amanda.

Yeah. I mean, I also don't know how I feel about this, but I think I'm one of the people who wanted to talk about it. And the I think what triggered it most recently is the Marriott conversation and like they we wouldn't have enough parking and we're not getting any money to do anything about it. And so like that feels really frustrating. Um and I guess yeah, it's like the sooner we talk about it, if something is going to come up next that's similar like that, then we have done something about it like or thought about it at least. Um, it also doesn't seem to matter. Like when it was a thousand dollars per space, still nobody was developing. So like obviously that wasn't there was something else going on like Anna was saying like so I don't know what the whole picture was of why things weren't happening then. Um but and I don't know like I guess I'm curious like our downtown seems pretty vibrant right now. It seems pretty full. Um, I don't know if there's a lot of like empty spaces that aren't being utilized or, you know, stuff like that. So, I guess I'm kind of curious like what projects could come to existing buildings like not obviously there could be new development, but um I don't know if that kind of plays into it and like and at this point, yeah, it's kind of weird. I think somebody brought it up of like, well, I'm already here. My business is already here, but you're the new business and now you're the parking problem. Like, that doesn't really feel equal. Um, so I don't know. It's complicated. I don't know how I feel about it, but I do want I am wanting to talk about it and visit it like dive in. I think I was the only one on council at that time and I don't remember the full conversation because I do know that this little thing called COVID was happening

at the same time, right? So, uh I think that's why that we tabled it. But I do recall that we looked back at the 2019 parking study and then we looked at the Cascade lot and what was the other lot that we looked at to talk about a parking garage? Columbia.

Columbia. There we go. and that ultimately what the memo mentioned is that fee and loo wasn't going to be enough to fund any sort of parking structure that we needed to have like public private partnerships at that time. We we tentatively talked about like okay well is this an opportunity for mixed use. I believe that the justice center was also in conversation at the time with the county. So there was just a lot happening all at the same time. Um, which is why I think we ended up just tableabling part of the discussion, but I I wasn't able to find the minutes from that. I couldn't go back to the council um on our website to see the video or to look at the minutes. So, I don't remember the full conversation, but I do agree that this is something we should add to a work plan session and continue having more discussion and that it does align with the uh hotel parking passes that we were just discussing in addition to housing. Grant and then Doug.

Um yeah, alluded to by councelor Gay. This the the fee itself seems to me historically that's been treated the fee just in isolation has been treated as a a pendulum. Um sometimes high, sometimes low and just swinging it back and forth doesn't really achieve the outcomes that council is looking for because it's looked at in isolation. um this fee by itself does not have the economic power of the Federal Reserve. Um so in that analogy I I disagree with the mayor in saying that the the fee has that kind of economic power. um that I agree with councelor Cavaleri that we should look at it in a work session uh more more holistically um and address this fee uh the hotel parking fee uh tsp related things in a more holistic manner um parking meter rates all of the stuff that goes into our traffic infrastructure um in the downtown core and the rest of the city to truly evaluate how the entire network actually works and then we can actually have a more cohesive plan as opposed to peacemealing these things together somewhat haphazardly because then we sort of end up with this disjointed uh plan that we're hopefully peacemealing together. But otherwise we just end up with this pendulum that swings wildly back and forth without any sort of cohesiveness in any way, shape or form. Um, it sounds like we need a parking study. I think I said it earlier. I I don't know. I mean I mean we we need a parking study that's going to address the parking challenges that we have. Um I feel like if we have a work session that we allow people to come to, we'll

hear from a lot of people that are upset about parking. Some of them will be warranted. Some of them will be just emotionbased. I didn't find parking this one time. So, like I'm not super excited about that unless something like a parking study goes out and surveys people and does that in a in a coordinated manner that's going to remove standard deviation and and stuff that's not data impactful. uh or you know so um if if that was part of a larger parking study and if we wanted to discuss in addition to the parking study update to do something in a work plan next year where we can budget for it and plan for it and do all that sort of thing like I agree peace meal is difficult. I agree um also with the mayor that I think in this this example it's like you got to kind of set it where it's where it should be. Um, it's a rock and a hard place. Like, yeah, it's not going to fund a parking garage, but we also don't want to give away all the parking either. Um, we don't want to save off development, but we, you know, like we want to encourage it, but we don't want to encourage rampid development that doesn't have any parking for everybody just cuz it's so difficult right now for people to build anything that they're going to take every dollar that they can, right? So, like, do we want to give up parking because of that? Like I think like that that's that's the consideration I think the mayor is looking for about where do we find the place where we where we disincentivize the sort of like rampant like no one's going to put in parking uh versus you know like like what's what's happened lately and why why we've seen in loo paid it it was the project was able to uh go forth but it's uh it was it was a project that had to take that into consideration like whether I can do this without parking or not like it should be a consideration, right? So, I don't have a really good answer for like what the number is, but I agree with the mayor that like, you know, trying to find where that number is is an important exercise, but I also kind of feel like we've talked about parking a bunch tonight and we've talked a bunch about like how it's super complicated and everything and like we're just going to complicate it more if we just like

have a work session that's not based on datadriven decisions. Um, so if it were me, again, I'd say I'm going to I'm going to try to get a bigger parking study onto a work plan, get it budgeted for the next fiscal year. Um, and and build upon the uh the the parking update. Uh, and I'm happy to to further discuss this particular what what should the number be if anybody has anything in mind. I just find it kind of impossible to do because it's because of what I just said. It's rock in a hard place. Like and I think the mayor acknowledged that too. It's a hard exercise to do.

As before, it would be great if we could tell staff what the majority of us believes

about the the number should we what do you mean? What what what would we like what would we like Steph to do? Grant, I'm fine with not taking any action at this time. And and excellent. Absent a motion, that's what we will be telling them. Anna,

I would like to um have some time to review the parking study that we have uh and determine whether or not we necessarily need an update of that or if we can utilize the information that we have currently to determine if we need to take additional action. And I think that that would be a good use of a work session um time, an hour or two, and um and then determine from there whether or not it needs to be budgeted and then added to a work plan overall.

We need help from staff to review that or we can each go do our homework. Is that what you're imagining, Anna? Um, I I mean it'd be great if all of us can dedicate some time to doing our own homework and then come back with questions to staff or if they can give us kind of an overview of, you know, here's what here are the highlights from the 2019 study. Here are the updates that occurred and if we budgeted for the $35,000 that we're proposing we spend on an update to that will go towards, you know, addressing these items. I think that that would be really helpful to know. So, Anna, I know you've brought this sort of up before with like the comprehensive plan, and this I guess is a question for Abigail staff. Like, what is the best way for us to without like welcome to council? Uh, here are 7,000 pages of documents, read all of them, understand all of them, you're good to go. Like, is there a good method for us to like revisit some of our important documents to dedicate time? And if that's what a work session means, like, yeah, I think that's that's sometimes is a good thing to do. Like, hey, um, in two months, we're gonna, you know, we're going to go through the TSP with you and review the TSP and here are all the projects that you're doing right now and how they align to to the TSP might be all that we have at that point. But like other things that are coming in the future, like what what do you what if if what's what's your opinion on that, Abigail? Like how do we consume that information in a in a better way? That is a great question and I would love to hear from all of you about what works best for you. We did have a discussion a couple months ago in which we were unable to find time for a retreat and I said here are the I think there were at that time four or five different identified topics uh and so trying to bring those to you in a work session. So um I don't remember inloo was one of them uh communication

they're now on the

engagement framework they're all on. So, I've got uh some of those scheduled and tonight as part of this uh scheduled for your meetings uh coming up kind of those deeper dives. Um it's just you needing to commit to you know several hours of conversation that perhaps doesn't necessarily lead to an action but is a here's the general information so that everybody has a shared understanding. That's my goal from tonight's inlue conversation. Let's make sure everybody's got a shared understanding in vocabulary. Uh, you know, a little bit of the history and then hearing from you. Do you want some action in the future but not an action tonight? So, that's been my intent. I don't know if that's working well for you. If you want to see it a different way. Um, I don't know how to bring people quickly up to speed because the city is I often say to all of you, the city is a river that's been in motion and we're just like in the canoe right now. uh and it will continue after us and other folks will have to go back and revisit the decisions that you have made. So um I don't I don't know how to best help you with that but we uh are happy to provide information and walk you through whatever um whatever discussions and review you want to do.

It kind of reminds me of the mural conversation I think. Oh, I'm bringing you an update on murals in the next month. And what I what I realized was so hard about the mural conversation is it's a first amendment discussion, right? like free expression and who should be allowed to say what and in what way and those in my experience can just about literally go on forever. This in some ways is is similar. I mean parking is you know there's 20 of us we have 30 opinions about this. So uh I I'm I'm I'm a little reluctant to think a two-hour conversation is going to be super satisfying. Like some of it will get talked about but then we could go on for six more. So I just don't want to set us up for disappointment in that

in my mind any conversation like that. So for example, if you do the comp plan is a or here the shared piece of here's the history, here's the information, here's the vocabulary, everybody has a shared understanding and then do you want something more but not necessarily looking for immediate direction on it. And I guess like does the League of Oregon cities have any information about how other councils grapple with this? I

I can ask like you know I remember when I started on council and I was like you know I'm just reading reading reading and I'm like am I really fully understanding all this? like I can't ask questions of staff like all day long. Like is there a better way that we could all just like you know revisit that as counselors on a regular basis and and all that and and I don't know the answer but like I feel like you bring that up a lot and it's warranted just like you know like what do I need to understand about the parking study this year? What do I need to understand about the TSP this year? like from the staff to help like hurt the cats a little bit and focus on these three pages that are really relevant right now versus these 200 other ones that are not as relevant for May 2026 or whatever.

And I think all of you have attended the League of Oregon C's elected essentials and then of course they have their elected essentials um handbooks and and materials on their website but agreed it is a lot of information to learn in a very short amount of time. So I heard Grant suggest that we don't need to give staff direction to do anything at this point. Anna was suggesting that we should all go digest the 2019 study and then come back. I would like to be I would like us to be helpful to staff to tell them what what if anything we would like them to do. Glattus,

I think earlier I did hear a discussion around potentially having fee and Lou as part of the parking study update whatever may be given after we go and do some homework. like is that something that you feel you need to understand now to give you better direction? Do we include the fee and loo in a potential parking update? Staff is comfortable with that.

Yeah, I just go I mean again we have an update that would look in your budget as proposed that would look at field observations, changes, parking rates, changes in the field. It's a it's an item that I think we're familiar with. Is there some useful update to scope that? It may not impact the budget. It may that's a useful way to put it in some context of rather than just trying to hit the number. I mean that it's it's likely to come to come back and say in 2019 you or 2020 you adopted an interim solution. This is where you're you're still there. You haven't come up with a parking supply budget or a project that would help calibrate that number to what it is. Um that's you can pay somebody money to tell you that but I mean that's one of the observations that that they will come back with.

Doug and then Glattus.

Yeah. But I'm just wondering like to to you know the mayor's point like we we have a defined sort of criteria when when a lot hits capacity or 85% capacity then we're going to change the number. Like could we have something similar for inloo where it's like we we set the number in a strategic way based on uh you know desired objectives you know right now in 2026 we want to increase supply of X because we're seeing a decline in that what do we change the number to or the program to to do that right like I I think it's something that does need to be revisited like by its very nature

yes and in uh I mean part of the scope too or the uh consultant report We did see that they suggested that we look at this on an annual basis. $3,000 was the fee was intended as an interim, not as permanent, and that we are six years into the interim and that it absolutely is time to to revisit.

I'm feeling at least two camps. the camp of we should we should reread 2019 and see how satisfied we are with the existing information or what I'm going to call the stina idea new parking study time to fund that and Dustin says we can roll in in lie with that I' I'd like to be helpful to staff what what's a majority of feel sometimes a motion helps decide that I ask a quick question so the $35,000 for the study would come out of the parking and Lou fees that we've already collected. That's correct. So that's I was looking at the budget earlier today and it's um

looks like there was 90 um almost $100,000 of total requirements out of the for the proposed budget. Um, so I don't know what the other costs were. Professional services, machinery and equipment, and contingency budgetary 50 grand. Was that that's where I'm just curious. Contingency. I think we just did you just place 50,000 in every contingency plan just just in case. So it's it's an allocation. It's not really spoken for and pledged to a particular project. So the So 35 35 is the professional services for the study. Okay. and maybe it goes up if we start adding items to it.

Okay. Yep. I just wanted So that's how we're paying for it is we're taking our already collected um parking and loo fees to pay for an updated study. Um and I just kind of the general consensus that I I I understand from most people that I've talked to is they thought that the parking and loo money that we've collected would go towards eventually building more parking. So um I don't know how I feel about how do you guys feel about using I don't know I think it can. It doesn't have to. Well, are we all okay with taking our time to go through the 2019 parking study, come back and then discuss the stina editions of edition

edition moving forward? Like is are folks okay with that? That way we get both fine with that. I know it sounded like there was a concern in terms of like, well, we're doing the budget right now. If we can sort this out and make an adjustment, right, that's what I was hearing. Um, that that was kind of where the I don't know who said it.

He's not brains turned much at this point. Um, you know, that there was a little bit of a somewhat of a sense of urgency uh on that part. Um, I don't know if we can, you know, go for that and then do a budget amendment afterwards. Like I think at this point probably uh I think that's good. I don't you know if we can just adjust this down the road if necessary and not try and rush something to try and get this done before the budget is done, I would be in favor of that. I do very much agree with Doug that this is sounding like we need to have a more robust study than what is budgeted for, but it's not a bad idea to re got and it was seven years ago. So

Amanda, yeah, I was just going to say I don't know if you were even talking about taking it out of the budget, but I think we should definitely keep something there in it. No, maybe that's not what you were saying. No, I was I could have very well may have said that. Um, no. I was saying adding more to the budget to fund these extra elements that are not part of the current study. Yeah, because I still think we need to have a professional revisit some level of current parking because a lot has changed in that time. But yeah, anyway, that's all I want.

But as of now, the only thing that's not in there is this inloo study or inloo for an update in the study for parking. Earlier I heard you ask for a hotel study as well or possibly now I'm asking this is study as of now in an update for parking study in lie is not scoped right

not specifically if you wanted to target and really make sure that that was robust I would bring that to the folks that I think we're going to scope this with like are you comfortable with this given the sense of importance that was raised on this matter So, as we're having budget discussions now, I think I'm hearing my peers say, could we potentially reserve some dollars to potentially add inlate so that that can be studied? Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

But do we need to be more directive because it's not in scope right now and if we need to look at it now to get the data that we need for a later conversation like we need to give you that clarity because it's not in scope right now. I I think that was we we gathered that from your general consensus. I'm not sure which way we're going. Are we going towards the review and do our homework or we going towards the expand the scope of the budgeted study? Doug,

I think we need to review and do our homework in general to prepare for a conversation about a bigger parking study. I think that's one thing. Unrelated to that, it's already in the study. We know it's in the last study. We should revis revisit in lie. Sounds like it would come in under budget. If it wasn't, you would certainly let us know and then maybe it would be scrapped. But I would like to suggest that I make a motion. Please do. I suggest or I'm not going to suggest I I want staff to look at adding inloo parking to the shortened study that's being done now. Uh if it can come in within contingency budget. Moved by Stpina. I'll second. Second by Rivera. Discussion.

All in favor? I I opposed chair votes. I hallelujah. Great. Thanks you guys very much. We're going to take a quick break. That's it, right? That's Oh, wait. No, I think it is.

I think they're doing fantastic work. I really, really, really, really think we can't get in the business of giving money out $148 at a time because it's going to take us forever to do our business. So, unfortunately, I suggest that we do not honor a request such as this. I was going to make a motion that we honor the right price. And that's how we decide. Totally fair. That's how we decide. I will say in the past we used to have a lot of these come kind of on the fly and council will make the decision at the end of the meeting. When possible, I have tried to encourage folks to let us know ahead of time and they've been in your packet as either consent agenda or I've asked them to come do a presentation. So, I'm sorry that this one uh you didn't get very much preparation for.

So, Anna, if you would make a motion, that'd be great. I make a motion that we um wave the the transient um what was it? The transient merchant fee for wild wind and water for this summer. Move by Cavaleri. I'll second. Second by Gakei. Discussion. All in favor? Yes. I opposed. Chair votes nay. Motion passes. Thank you. What else have I got for many reports? Anna. Uh, none from me. Benjamin.

Fun fact, my legal name is Ben. Right on the birth certificate. Anything else? Benjamin,

we have a sergeant-at-arms here to take care of this. Um, uh, cat meets uh, Wednesday. Um, the county has been meeting. They're in budget. I think the big piece that I continue to get a lot of questions about is when is the planning commission for the county going to decide on the Amazon warehouse and that will be on May 27th where a final decision will be made. So stay tuned. Um, and then MCAC met last Tuesday. the conversations continue for a year-round shelter and we are like this close to wrapping up those discussions and having a better understanding. Um and then I just wanted to share that um you know thank you to the city there is a water and sewer utility discount program through MCAC. Uh, one of the requirements is that you are a low-income resident of Hood River, that you're an active city of Hood River customer, and you may qualify for the discount on the monthly water and/or sewer bill. Um, so you apply for utility assistance through MCAC. Uh, I do know that the uh MCAC marketing individuals working with Jackie to get some advertising to get this up, it sounds like this program is not as highly utilized. And so just wanting to make sure that we are getting the word out. So I know that uh Jackie is fully aware and that there will be more marketing about that. Uh and that is everything for me. Thank you

Doug. Uh none for me this week. Grant. Uh region one act had their meeting. Time is abstract at this point. Um talked about the the CIP capital improvement plan. um and picked things on to put on the list. It was the same list as last time. That's it. Thank you, Amanda. I don't have anything.

There's a housing summit coming up in Redmond. I've been asked to speak for the as a the chair of the board of the housing authority. That's on June 9th. I think that Will and Dustin are also going. I'm eager to see what that's all about. Perhaps we'll get, you know, a bunch of money or something. I don't know how much virtual option there is. I know that it's in person. It's in uh it's at a resort in Redmond. Um no other comments for me. Council comments. Amanda, I don't think I have anything. Grant,

I'm so tired right now. Um I will I will uh there's from the bridge authority there's a career day event happening on May 21st on Thursday uh from 9 to 1 um down at uh lot one. There will be a bunch of heavy equipment and fun things for people to do and see and high school students and can come and see trades and do various things with heavy machinery. not literally run heavy machinery, but come see stuff and talk with various people who will ideally be working on the bridge soon. Um, so hopefully we are able to get the funding to finish and go do that. We just need to hopefully be awarded the VIP grant and then we can go get to work on that. Um, I am too tired, so I will pass to Doug. Thanks, Doug. Uh I I had a quick conversation with with Dan and Abigail earlier and I'm hoping we can summarize that a little bit just to provide some clarity to um everybody up here. So I think we often grapple with like how do we how do we get how do we garner like support to discuss something on on on up here, right? Like how do we get an agenda item? The mayor sets the agenda that's clear, but sometimes the mayor would like to know like are people interested in discussing this, right? And rather than have the mayor go out and poll people, like I think a lot of us have been hesitant to say like um speak to all the counselors about I want to discuss this. I'm not telling you what my position is. I think it's important right now because of X reason. I think we should all discuss it. I'm going to ask the mayor to put it on the agenda. How do you feel about that? And I think we get squirrely about that. Like, oh, that's going to be a serial meeting. So, I asked Dan for a little bit of information about like, can I do that sort of thing? Can I say, hey, Grant, I'm really interested in X and I think we should talk about it. Um, I want to ask the mayor to get it to put it on the agenda item and Grant says yes. Then I

go ask Amanda and like oh do I have to stop there because I've talked to two counselors. So Dan, can you can can you give us a little bit of direction on that just to make everybody feel a little bit better about how they go about doing that?

Sure. Um the the question appears to pertain to the limits of the public meetings act and uh how extensive discussions can be outside of a meeting before you run into a violation of it. And the the point of this discussion is to get something on the agenda for a council discussion in an open public meeting. you are allowed to talk to your fellow counselors about what should be on what should be on the agenda and um you know when something occurs to us as staff we kind of take the temperature to see if there's a critical mass for getting particular item on the agenda and those sorts of discussions are allowed you know you're not allowed to um discuss outside of a meeting through an email or or phone calls or whatever things that ought to be the subject of city council deliberations. That's not what you're talking about. You should question, should we put it on the agenda? Um, you can't cook votes. You can't like, you know, count votes for or against a particular item that would be the substantive subject of a council discussion. Um, what you're looking for is is there support to talk about this? And that's that's wholly appropriate. You are not doing your job if you're not communicating with your counselors. Your ideas will be better formed and better informed if you know what some other counselors think about them.

Great. And so that allows for a robust full discussion in a as a deliberation in a council meeting. Fantastic. And that's my that's my service to council today is get Dan to weigh in on something. Thank you. But

yeah, I just wanted to thank uh Sam Murio with the Oregon Food Bank uh and Mara Verdus Ortega with uh RO, the Rural Organization Project and Hood River Latino Network for an invite to Mayday, which was May 1st. Uh at the cap, there were several guest speakers like Pun or Reena Lopez from Pun. Um there were a lot of local elected officials, state representatives and there the governor was also there. This is a day that is really focused on you know like the labor workforce. It's something that is uh recognized nationwide internationally I I guess but this one was really focused on some of the economic impacts that are specific to immigration. Uh so appreciate all those that were there. where there were thousands of people in Salem. I got a nice little tan out of it and got to meet some incredible people out there doing some really good work. Um, I've also just been thinking about business collaboration in general given that the Amazon warehouse has been in discussion at the county and I know that we already have a moratorium on data centers and that's not specific to what I'm thinking but as we think about housing we need to make sure that there is uh that there are jobs here right and so how are we as a city welcoming businesses to potentially come here to start whatever it may be. Um, so I've just been thinking a lot about that. I've been talking during Mayday, there were some individuals that were part of the unions and were talking about how in their contracts they have really specific verbiage around what they call community benefits. So if a business is coming into town, um, they'll use like local builders and developers to build the brick and mortar. they will look at

um to partner with the cities or the counties for housing. So those public private partnerships and so as we think about our code update and what are we doing to attract some businesses to come here and operate within the city of Hood River, some things for us to think about and to do some more research so that we do have good paying jobs after we get all this housing built. That's it. Uh, nothing much for me. Uh, but I just want to say I really appreciate you asking that question, Doug, because I do feel that way. Um, sometimes when things are, you know, all of a sudden pop up before council that weren't necessarily, you know, on the um agenda or, you know, I may not have a fully formed opinion at that at that time and sometimes it makes me a little bit leerary to to answer uh one way or the other. So, appreciate you asking that question. I think there's an interesting point there also that I took me a while to glean which is it's also part of the transparent public meeting process that the agenda is published so that people can know what we're going to like if I was like you know I think we should really paint the streets pink like the people who care about that didn't come tonight because that wasn't on the agenda so you know there's some back channeling but then it needs to be forthright to say we are going to discuss such and such topic and then like tonight these folks show up. So, it's an interesting line between, you know, spring stuff on each other and the public versus having it be, you know, out there.

Anna.

Okay. I have two things. Um, vote. Ballots are due Tuesday 519, a week from tomorrow. And I'm going to put in my own personal plug for parks and wreck. Um, those of us in this community have had the benefit of um, past community members investing in our pool. I think if I've got the timing right, in 1988, uh, the parks and recck district was formed to save the pool as an aquatic center. And if folks hadn't passed that back then, we wouldn't have it today to be um, voting on for future, you know, for for our for ourselves and the future folks. So, um, our kids and neighbors have had this amenity because those folks voted in 88 and let's pay it forward. So, that's my little personal plug. Um, the other thing is, uh, kind of in line with what Doug was bringing up, um, on September 8th of 2025, we had an executive conversation with no decision made regarding a real property matter affecting a downtown business owner and the city. And I would like to revisit this matter. So, I'd like to ask Dan if we could um if it needs to be revisited in executive session or during a regular meeting, and I'd like it to be added onto the agenda.

Good. I don't have a ton of experience with this about getting items on an executive session. I frankly don't remember what topic it is. Um but we will we will talk about it. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. September 8th, 25.

Great. Uh, does that bring us to the executive session? Then I will read the script. The city council will now meet in executive session pursuant to OS192.661E to conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing body to negotiate real property transactions. Representatives of the news media and designated staff are allowed to attend the executive session. All other members of the audience are asked to leave the room and we will end the public broadcast. Representatives of the news media are specifically directed not to report on any of the deliberations during the executive session except to state the general subject of the session as previously announced. No decision may be made nor final action taken in executive session. The executive session is anticipated to last 25 minutes. At the end of the executive session, the city council meeting will be adjourned and no action will be taken. We will now discontinue the live feed and recording. And that's a little bit of that transparent thing, too. like if somebody wants to be watching us, they should know that in hopefully 25 minutes we're not going to like reopen the council and talk about a bunch of important stuff that they cared about. So we, you know, trying to be a little bit predictable. Jen, are we ready? Somebody can close the doors.