City Council - Regular Meeting

convene welcome to your city council meeting for june 8th 2026 i'm mayor blackburn i'll call us to order first we're going to silence our cell phones then we're gonna take a moment to remember that as we gather today, we respectfully acknowledge that the land on which the city of Hood River sits is the ancestral home of indigenous peoples. This includes the Nez Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs, Yakima and other tribes who stewarded this land for generations. We recognize the lasting impact of colonialism and commit to working together for a more just and sustainable future. Please join me as we say the pledge of allegiance. Congratulations to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Because of staff being caught in traffic, we're going to change the order of events and urban renewal will be a bit later in the evening. Are there any other changes to the agenda, Abigail?

No, thank you, Mayor. There are no changes.

Next is the time for business from the audience. I don't have a sheet in front of me. Jen, is there anyone online who wishes to address us? Thank you.

Thank you.

Come on up, Mr. Perrin.

Thank you. I wanted just to start with that. I'm not, this is the first time I've kind of been coming in front of the council. I purchased the buildings about almost 30 years ago. And back in the day when I was restoring the buildings and everything, there was nothing in the top floors. And so they were just in horrible condition. So everything I did was improving. And so everybody was super supportive. And now that we've, you know, in a whole different time and things are a lot more complicated than they were back then, it's been it's been, you know, a rough journey trying to understand the process. Abigail's been fantastic in helping me through that process. And I appreciate all of your guys' time. I know you guys have spent a lot of time on this, wrangling it back and forth. But it seems like Abigail's come up with an alternative that will take us into the time given, allowing the council to have time to review it holistically, the parking, whether hotels should have a spots and all of that. And so the 3rd and Oak, I have a loading zone there and they put in that expanded curb on the urban renewal. And so it is a really difficult spot now for an actual loading zone. Just a half a block, only three spaces down on Oak, there's another loading zone, which is a normal backend part type loading zone. So Abigail's suggestion of, would it be possible to relocate that, create a paid spot there instead, which works much better because that spot's not the greatest, and then move that loading zone to the third street, We were thinking of the top close to the corner, but after talking to all of my businesses in there, we have about 30 businesses inside of the two buildings. I have the two largest buildings in downtown with the most tenants of any place in town. they're saying that that might not be the best spot. We should put it at the bottom of the block because then people would be able to come in, go right into a loading zone. And there isn't the... The having to the pedestrians that are crossing right there at third note if people want to get into that first spot as a loading zone, they would have to go out into. The flow of track or the flow of pedestrians to get back in there, so I tend to agree with that, so I think the process i'm not sure I think the process is I. ask the council to allow this to be something that you guys can consider, and that is trading the 30-minute spot for a spot down, and I am hoping that I don't know how the process works.

That was the timer. So if you could wrap up.

Yeah. So I'm hoping that I can be in the process to where it just doesn't make the decision. I can have people that come in that are supporting a 10 minute spot for the buildings at the bottom of the block. would be something that would be considered and not just decided, but allow me to present to the council, have people here with testimony showing why a 10-minute spot is far better than a 30-minute loading zone.

Thank you. Now, public hearing. I will read the script. Chris, are you ready? Thank you. This is the time scheduled for a public hearing regarding the approved budget for the 26.7 fiscal year and the use of state shared revenue for the City of Hood River. The approved budget uses state shared revenue as a general fund revenue source, supporting police, fire, EMS, parks, engineering, and planning programs. We will now take public testimony. City recorder, has anyone registered to speak or provided written testimony? public hearing on fiscal year 26-7 approved budget and use of state shared revenue is now closed. That's what my script says. Now is it your turn?

Okay. Yes. Thank you. So the budget committee deliberated over the course of three meetings and the proposed budget was approved by the committee as presented at the third meeting on May 13th, 2026. The fiscal 2026-27 budget continues ongoing operation programs and service levels from the prior fiscal year. Total FTE for city personnel is unchanged. Major initiatives budgeted for the fiscal year include funds for a comprehensive utility rate study, parking management study, and bond planning. The general fund also includes a transfer in support of the building fund, and the overall budget proposes a loan to the urban renewal fund. the Oberonua District in support of housing production from the Affordable Housing Reserve. Additionally, the budget establishes the ODOT Jurisdictional Transfer Reserve and contributions to the PERS Stabilization Reserve. Public works and capital improvement planning includes funds for continued improvement on critical water, wastewater, stormline pipe replacement, as well as road repairs across town. Large public work projects include wastewater treatment plan upgrades and improvements to the Jackson Park, Collin Field area. All of these are outlined in the five-year capital improvement plan within the proposed budget. These... A summary of the $53.5 million in budget appropriations of the approved budget appears in the resolution 2026-11, and staff is recommending approving resolutions 2026-11 and 2026-12, adopting the budget for fiscal 2026-27 for the city of Red River, imposing and categorizing tax levies, and electing to receive state shared revenues. Thank you.

Thank you, Chris. We all were here many Wednesdays. few Wednesdays back for the work leading up to this. This is the actual actual. Any comments or questions for Chris? Anna, and then Gladys.

I just, I read in the memo and you just mentioned that the fiscal year, major initiatives budgeted for the fiscal year include the parking management study, but we decided maybe we aren't gonna do that. It's just included in case we decide we are gonna do it, right? That's just, it's still up in the air, right? We're definitely not allocating. that money, right? Didn't we have that conversation? I guess it's more a conversation or question for all of you. Like it's a placeholder in case we do move forward with it, but it's not predetermined that we definitely are. Is that correct?

Well, so staff has been working off of a parking management study. There were several issues that were raised during the budget committee with regards to, well, and actually not council, right? So things like best practices for downtown parking, loading zones, right, hotels. So that is in the budget, and we are actually out right now with an RFP for that. Now, it doesn't obligate the city to engage anyone, but we have issued an RFP for the downtown best practices parking study.

Is that the same as the update that we talked about maybe not doing, or this is different? I guess I want a clarification for that, because I remember us having the conversation during a council meeting of... That, you know, where was the money coming from? And were we moving forward with that? Or were we just going to do an update of the parking study? Like, were we going to do an update? Or I guess I just wanted clarification on that. Are we, is that you're moving forward with an RFP for that parking study? Or is that different than what?

I apologize if I misunderstood, but I had taken it that that question had come up is if we wanted to do it at all. And I thought the consensus of council was that we wanted to move forward. So I'm misremembering. Let me know. You know, having an RFP out does not mean that we have to award it. But that was that was I thought the council direction. Sorry, Chris, if you had more to say.

And then just to be clear, those are the funds that are allocated in the in lieu fund. So I believe there's $35,000 in change that was in the parking in lieu fund. That's the parking study that's allocated.

Okay. Yeah, I remembered we had that conversation, but I thought we decided we would earmark it, but we weren't definitely moving forward. We were going to talk more about parking, but I might be misremembering that too. Thank you.

I recall that we had all agreed that we were and that one of the other pieces that you didn't mention, but I know that we discussed it, was to also include parking in lieu as well and that we weren't going to do a full study, but just an update on certain sections like the hotel loading zones in lieu and a couple others that you just mentioned. So that was my recollection two meetings ago is when that took place.

I was confused by what you just said. Your recollection was that we were.

That we were going to do just an update, not necessarily a full study, but an update on certain sections, because the last time we did a full study was in 2019 and that there were some pieces, um, that were brought up two meetings ago, like the hotel passes, for example, was one of them. Parking in lieu was one of them, a couple others. And so we said, we're not gonna do a full scope, but we will do an update to these sections. That was my recollection.

Yeah, then the items that I had, we had talked about doing an overall update to the downtown parking sort of methodology and best practices, right? Just sort of a revisiting of that. But I also had added from council comments The hotel parking pass, there was potential app options or 15-minute intervals, fee in lieu, right? A couple others, about five items.

And did those items constitute the project we've put out for bid, or are those a small part of a larger, or can you help me understand?

Yeah, so those are parts of the larger study.

Yep. So what I'm hearing is Anna thinks we agreed to not do too much. Gladys and Chris, to my ear, said the same sort of highlighted items, but I think I heard you say that not as a part of a much larger study. But rather, you were describing sort of a few a la carte items. Did I get that?

Yeah, that was my recollection of it. But I don't know if anyone else has any other comments.

But I think what Abigail and Chris are moving forward with is substantially not what Anna and Gladys have just said. Am I tracking this? Doug?

It's my understanding is it's not a full blown parking study to negate or update the entire 2019 study. There were things that were planned for update and we asked for more than what was planned. That's correct. So not a full study, never was a full study, was an update to the 2019 study. And we asked for specific reasons, parking and loo, that you just, so we said, make sure that's in there as well.

Yeah, that's correct.

So update plus is what? Update plus. You started this. Does update plus agree with your memory?

I thought we were going to talk about it more before we move forward, but I don't know. I thought we needed it. I thought we were going to talk about it more before it was moving forward, but I could be missing something. So I'm curious what everybody else is remembering.

Yes, I was pulling up the minutes from May 11th, which were approved on May 26th. And there's a motion here. I got to find the page again. Let's see. It was councilor's subpoena seconded by council president Rivera. I moved to direct staff to look at adding the in lieu parking to the shortened study that is being done right now. If it can come within contingency budget. Yeah, I think we've been calling it an update, but there was a motion passed unanimously. So I guess that's where I got the, like, we are doing the shortened study and it will include in lieu as part of it.

I think this is important to note because for whatever reason, there's a perception in the public that we're redoing every single parking study point that we've ever done. And we're just going to do study after study. That is not the case. This is a addendum to the study from 2019. And then we wanted some specific language around what you just discussed to be included in that as well. That's correct.

I appreciate that. That sounds good to me.

Did you have anything that you wanted to bring up that we can discuss now or? Do you have any concerns with that?

I just think that, like, the whole, like, we need to set a time aside where we can have a specific conversation, like a work session or something where we can address parking. And we don't need to do that right now. This is about adopting our budget. I just wanted clarification on, you know, was this plan to be included? And so, yeah, that's what I was just looking for clarification on that. But we don't need to discuss it right now.

So we are still on Chris bringing us the budget. Go ahead, Liz.

I do just want to bring up three things for the budget. In the series of budget meetings, we have allocated $15,550 to small grants. So I want to raise three things. I would propose that we have general fund contributions that go to the small grant fund moving forward. I was actually talking to Chris and like, what's a good number to allocate so that in the future, should we have any sort of, this would be used as contingency funds. Some of the conversations that I've had with a couple of you have heard from community members is sponsoring youth sports. Baseball, soccer, all of that. And that the second piece that we allocate at least five thousand dollars of the current fifteen thousand five hundred and fifty two nonprofits for mental health support, something that we heard from our listening sessions with individuals who are from the immigrant community that are being challenged right now. So I guess that's. Yeah, those are the three things that I just wanted to bring up for consideration so that we can add this to this current budget.

I reckon we should take those one at a time. Help me understand, but it would be council amending this budget to include some or any of those. Is that your wishes for this budget? Yes.

For this budget, for sure that we allocate at least $5,000 of our $15,000 in small grants to a nonprofit for mental health support and that we allocate, let's say, $1,000 for sponsorship of youth sports. And third, that... not necessarily for this budget, or maybe Chris, help me out, but that we do allocate a specific percentage of the general fund to the small grants moving forward so that we have more than the $15,000 for next year's budget.

So I can walk through the budget impacts of those. So in the budget, the small grants fund has an opening fund balance of, I believe it's $15,500. 15,000 of which is allocated or appropriated within the budget, but with no specific purpose. So as either part of this action or a separate council action, it is well within council's authority to appropriate $5,000 for mental health and earmark that $1,000 goes towards youth sports. That has absolutely no budget impact. It's just making a clarification as to where those appropriations should be specifically directed. Now to the third, there is a budget impact here. What is proposed is an additional contribution to the small grants. If it was done as part of this budget, it would have a impact or a potential impact on the budget, depending on where the funds came from. If it is a policy decision with regards to something that would be considered in a future budget, then I don't know that that's, I don't know that that is something that has any impact here. That would really be a policy decision whether or not that's something that would, you know, that the council wants to consider in future budgets. Sorry.

Yeah, it's the latter of the two, not for this budget, but that we have a discussion to allocate dollars for next year's budget. Yeah.

So, yeah. From my perspective, that's a big topic, right? And I would suggest that that either happens as part of a sort of council motion or in the lead up or as part of the budget committee for next year. Now, it's very, very different if you want to do something for this budget year, but for next budget year, I would say that would be part of that process. Thanks.

Well, then I guess help me out. So I think we can have a discussion about the current funds to allocate to mental health and youth sports, but for the second or the third piece, maybe I look to both of you for a better direction of, it sounds like that might not be a discussion for tonight's meeting, but that we maybe add it at a future meeting to discuss that.

Yeah. I was so, so, um, If the intent is to not to do that for this budget, then that has no impact on the appropriation, has no impact on the resolutions, has no impact on this portion of the adoption of the budget. Abigail, I'll defer to you on just protocol. It would be added to a separate council item, either this council or a future council. The third aspect is it could just be part of the overall budget process. as far as an appropriation at that time, but probably should be discussed by council before the draft budget is issued.

Thanks, Chris. I would agree that I think there are a number of policy questions about what the criteria would be and how carefully you would want to monitor or audit that. And there might be some administrative costs that come with that. So I would want to have a more comprehensive conversation about that if you choose to do so.

Okay. Uh, yeah, just a couple of things, uh, direct response. I support the allocations for the two items that councilor Rivera just suggested. I also suggest, you know, I think it's like, we just have a bucket of $15,000 sitting there. There's no real intentional way. I mean, this, this is, this is one way to do it, but I think what councilor Rivera is saying is, you know, let's be a little bit more intentional as we go into budget discussions and not like in the 11th hour or not, uh, you know, um, maybe prepare the budget committee to discuss those sorts of things and wrap them in. I would be in favor of that and understand that it's a secondary thing, not today, but I think it just allows us to be more proactive in how we think about those types of disbursements too, because it could change year by year and whatnot. So I think it would help organize us better.

In my opinion, giving away money is a serious job and a lot of work. Tonight, we're just deliberating whether to approve a $53.5 million budget, and this is a $15,000 topic. I think that we should be really careful about getting into the grant-making business because there's excellent causes that you suggest. There are other excellent causes out there and we could spend a whole lot of time choosing among excellent causes. And I think that we would be overwhelmed by that. So I'm going to discourage us from soliciting or even entertaining non-profit applications we have deviated from that guiding principle a little bit we helped with the trolley one time we helped with the warming shelter but i don't think it would i don't want us to become more of a grant making entity grant

I agree with the mayor also for us to decide this at the 11th hour is sort of us hooping in at the 11th hour, deciding to allocate these funds in this manner without us discussing it at all in advance of this meeting and allocating it in the last five minutes of this 11th hour process, to borrow that phrase. So I would not be in favor of allocating that particular grant fund in this particular way. And then the future budget allocations, I'm not interested in entertaining at all because that's a decision for next year's budget committee.

Go ahead. Amanda, you were...

I do wanna bring up that this is not the first time that I discussed this. I actually did bring this up in our last, very last budget meeting. I didn't bring up the youth sports, but I did talk about allocating dollars for mental health support for immigrant community members specifically because we had listening sessions for adults and for teens, and that was an ask that was made that there was more support needed. So it's definitely not the first time that I bring this piece up, and I did bring it up in our last budget meeting. I could even forego not dedicating any funds towards like sponsoring a youth sport, but for sure, the fiscal support for mental health support was something that I think we should really absolutely consider. And I did bring this up in our last budget meeting.

Amanda.

I'm just curious about like the history of this, I guess, like what has it just been sitting there and not being used? Has it been used for other things? Like what?

Yeah, so originally the small grants fund, I believe it was established, there was a brick buying program.

Yeah, it originally helped funds collected for the bricks that people have their names on at the fountain. And so I might want to double check that. the monies in the balance aren't dedicated for Stratton Garden maintenance. But I'm not sure. That's just off the top, so I don't bet on that.

It's in our budget book. It's the other grants or small grants distribution. It's $15,550, and it's in our current budget book.

Yes, so it has, but it is the small grants budget that has been a carried over budget. It has been for at least the last four years or so. I don't know the history of it before that. It is not of the funds that are allocated in the budget. It has an appropriation should council elect to use it, but it's not a staff appropriated or a staff sort of discretioned fund. To your point, I think that it is there are the funds there. Staff can look and see what the rules are regarding small grants. Council is always throughout the year able to bring up where those funds should be directed to if there is a specific use for them. So it's not necessarily something that has to be decided here, but it absolutely can be discussed among council and can and for this year, for this fiscal year, can be spent up to the balance of the

Well, then I would suggest that we discuss what Council Rivera is suggesting in an agenda item, because I do believe that based on the output that we had from all those listening sessions and whatnot, that that's an important thing. It's not just like somebody came to us and said, hey, I've got a cool nonprofit. How about we spend X amount of dollars? This is something that I think is directly related to our council goals for the year, input from the community. There's been a lot of time and consideration that's gone into it versus, oh, we've got some money to spend. Why don't we support this good cause? So I'm happy to have that debate with counselors and discuss it. I'm also happy to vote for it now, but I don't want to jam up the budget process.

A good way to find out how we all feel is to have a motion and vote on it. I don't know if anyone is prepared to put that together at this moment, but I want to know what we, the majority, believe. Gladys?

I'm okay bringing up these items at another meeting, maybe two meetings from now to not delay, but I still really want to make sure that we continue to have the discussion of allocating some dollars for mental health support in our community, but happy to table these items and move forward for the suggested motion on page four for our budget.

Thank you. Annemarie?

I'll go ahead and make that motion then. I move the City Council approve the resolution 2026-11 and 2026-12, adopting the budget for fiscal year 2026-27, imposing and categorizing tax levies, and electing to receive state shared revenue.

By Cavalieri.

Second.

Second by Gaeke. Further discussion?

I would just like to know when we can get that agenda item, or if we're saying... we have to have a discussion of whether or not that's an agenda item now.

It sounds sort of comically meta in that way, but in fact, yes, like us deciding what we had to our agendas and to our work plan and to staff's workload is a legitimate concern. So I don't know how we all feel about wanting to prioritize, and I'm going to editorialize a little bit, how we will spend $15,000 instead of the sweeping large policy issues that face the council, because our time is so precious. So I guess what I would suggest is I would like to hear a motion of whether to include this in a timely fashion as an agenda item upcoming. And then we can decide.

If I may, for a point of order, I think you already have a motion on the floor. And I think, was there a second? Yes. Okay. So my suggestion would be to finish this one and then go back on them. And I don't think you necessarily need a motion to have me put something on a future agenda. I just need to know that a majority of you are directing me to do that.

Yes. And I guess, just the spirit of dialectic, I think we've been getting a little bit permissive with our agenda, just saying...

So in our last budget meeting, I brought this up and was told that at that time we weren't going to discuss it, but that we were going to discuss it on the final budget agenda. I did have a chance to at least mention this to Chris prior to this meeting as like a heads up, I'm going to bring this back up because In the last budget meeting, I was told that we weren't going to discuss it at that time, but that we would discuss it now before we close due to our new budget starting July 1st. So that's why I'm bringing it up now and didn't continue to push on it at our last budget meeting in May.

There's a motion on the table. All in favor? Yes. Aye. Opposed?

Chair votes aye, motion passes.

Now, I would like to address this like, I would like us to decide if we wish to, I think as I said just a moment ago, in soonish, discuss this $15,500 small grants fund distribution. Is that the topic we're talking about? Yes.

I understand the challenges that you brought up mayor, you know, and that, that counselor Poulsen agreed to, and the intention isn't to add additional administrative work to staff, but that we did have some listening sessions. There's a lot that some of our partners are doing specific for our immigrant communities, but something that was brought up in a variety of sessions was the need for more ongoing support for mental health. So I still think that's really important for us to discuss, and that I'm not asking that we exhaust the full 15,000, that we give $5,000 of that currently to organizations It could either be one or two. However, staff suggest to the nonprofits that really are supporting mental health services in our community.

I would be in favor of talking about that. Is that what we're talking? Is that the question on the table?

I'm for it. I think that's it. I think Amanda's saying she would move to discuss this fund and this mental health focus. So that's, she said move. So no, she didn't. She said, I'd be in favor. So, I mean, sorry, you guys, I feel like I'm being negative.

I don't think so. That's what Abigail said.

Sorry, if I could clarify the scope of this conversation, is this what you just said may or maybe think that you're talking specifically about mental health funding, or is this a bigger question about nonprofit funding from the city?

I agree.

That's an important question.

And I would admit that I'm generally confused by all this here because it sounded like one, there was concern about whether this fund could even be dispersed because of some potential ties to Stratton garden maintenance. That's what I thought I heard. Number two, it didn't sound like this was a fund that has been dispersed from in some time. I believe Chris said that this is a carryover from a few years now. So I'm kind of confused about what the general... policy. We may not have one about the disbursement of these funds because this is kind of, you know, taken by surprise a little bit here. So philosophically, certainly in favor of those, those are great things. I just, it feels a little bit, I don't know, I'm a little bit caught off guard by this conversation in terms of since this is seemingly a relatively new thing, how we would decide to disperse this? Do I have options to choose from? Is it just kind of, I think this is, obviously we have the data from the listening sessions, but is this just I have an idea situation? So I would, again, while I'm philosophically certainly in support of those things, I'd kind of like a little bit more information on that if we've got it.

I think what Councilor Rivera is trying to do, we don't really have a framework for this kind of thing. It's not supposed to be talked about during the budget is kind of what the feeling was. We don't generally do this at all, right? So I share the confusion in the process, but I want to make clear that I just think that Councilor Rivera has brought this up before. This is tied into council priorities and council goals for the year. It's not like a, hey, we got $15,000 around, let's do something with it. I think it's tied into goals and everything. I think we should discuss it. And I think we can, you know, those of us that are in favor of it at that point, great. It would be good to get some direction from staff, like if Going into the next budget cycle next year, is this something we should talk about beforehand as a council? You know, and I know it's not a whole lot of money, but it is. Sometimes we might, based on the work that we've done for the year and what we're supporting, we might want to do this sort of thing. And there's probably a less awkward way to go about it. I'll say.

I agree that I'm confused. I agree that I think it's a bigger question than just, I mean, I think it's a worthy cause and something worth looking into, but I think when we say we have $15,000 of money that might be available for grants or for contribution towards a particular thing, I appreciate what the mayor said about we need to be careful about getting into the grant-making business because there is a lot of administration that gets tied to that. And if we're just saying we're going to start giving away money, well, what are the requirements for giving away that money? I think we're dangerously treading into some deep, dark waters here. So I agree with Amanda that we should talk about this more, but I think that it's a little bit more complex than just, hey, let's... allocate this money, which I appreciate that Chris said we have the authority to do. But yeah, this is kind of out of left field.

My understanding from my check-in with Abigail is that today we were going to have a discussion about the emergency declaration for immigration, what we wanted to do if we wanted to extend that. One of the pieces that I had brought up to her and brought up in our budget meeting was that we haven't discussed if we were going to allocate any sort of funds. A while back when I had asked Chris at a council meeting, what sort of contingency funds do we have? I was told that we don't have anything. It was this small grants is our contingency fund. All the other dollars that we have are already allocated to other projects. to other services so my intention isn't to catch folks off guard or to confuse folks it's that we already have an existing fund can we allocate dollars from that existing fund for these services that we continue to have discussions about so I would move that we continue to have a discussion around the 15,550 in small grants to potentially be allocated for mental health support services for the immigrant community.

Second. Second by Mr. Peters. Discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Chair Max Fennell, A motion passes.

Chair Max Fennell, A couple missing votes.

Chair Max Fennell, Opposed.

Chair Max Fennell, I'm not opposed to the.

Chair Max Fennell, I guess i'm. Chair Max Fennell, Voting.

Chair Max Fennell, Post. Chair Max Fennell, Was it yes.

Chair Max Fennell, i'm confused grant was it a yes or no. Chair Max Fennell, Yes. Chair Max Fennell, In favor, thank you. Chair Max Fennell, Chair votes I motion passes so vote by vote of six to one. we give staff direction to please put this on.

I'm sorry, go ahead.

We give staff direction to please get this on the agenda so that we can make time to discuss it.

Yes, and we can certainly start by researching the history of the fund, and we can send that out to you in an email as soon as we have that information. And then, go ahead.

Oh, I was going to say that. So the two, obviously the sort of the rules are very refined, whether or not these are dedicated can be issued. I think the other thing is we're talking about time tension in the past. There is a old expired resolution that had outlined what were previous guidelines with regards to

I think it was from 1995. Yeah.

And so we can all circulate that as a framework as far as how this was looked at and how it has been looked at in the past.

When you say donations, are those we're getting them or we're giving them? Giving them. Yeah. Thank you.

And then to Councillor Guerra's point about whether to extend the ICE emergency, that's not on this agenda. I had planned that for the next one because when I met with all of you, the agenda had already been set for today.

Thank you all for that important conversation. Did we approve the budget, Chris?

Yeah.

I'm going to turn the page and go to the consent agenda. I will note we have an OLCC permit application. So we're going to take number two off the consent agenda. And I... This is not quite in order, but there's a place advertising across from the Taqueria selling wine and smokes and stuff. And I don't remember approving that, but maybe I did. It's DBA or something.

Thank you. It was approved. It's been a few months ago, but yeah. Great. Thank you.

Thank you, Jeff. So we'll take number two off and I would entertain a motion for one through seven minus two.

I move to approve the consent agenda except for item number two. Moved by Paulson.

Second. Second by Rivera. Discussion. I'll notice that Sandy appears on here a lot of times. So there's some great HR with Sandy, wherever you might be out there. Thank you. And this is so important for a smooth running organization to have this kind of stuff in order. And much, much of it has not been, I can gather by all the items on here. So good job us.

Yeah. I would note that the policy, the payroll policy issues that are here are connected to the fact that we're moving from 24 pay periods a year to 26 pay periods because of some change in the IRS. So it is not a, a reflection of an organizational or structural issue. This is to be compliant with IRS required us to update some of our- I appreciate that. And all of our unions were consulted on these before they came to your agenda. Thanks.

Further discussion on the consent agenda? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Chair votes aye, motion passes. Great. I would entertain a motion to approve item number two from the consent agenda.

I'll make a motion that we approve item number two from the consent agenda, but it's for cork wine, not wine cork.

Thank you. Moved by Cavalieri. I assume that's a correct correction. I don't know. Second. Second by Polson. Thank you. Discussion? Connors?

I will abstain from LLCC permit applications. This is not a reflection of these establishment businesses or their owners. Rather, I object 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. I'd like to highlight the broader public health responsibility that we hold. The recent adoption of code allowing transportation networks is a step forward. but access and capacity remains limited, especially during late hours and in our upper valley. If we and our county-wide partners are able to provide adequate transportation during late evenings and weekends, I will start approving OLCC applications.

Thank you. And just parenthetically, I have a little bit of a hobby of trying to call an Uber from Hood River, and recently I have again tried and no rides available. So that's kind of reassuring, like glad to know that, because for a while it was like, oh, they're going to come and that didn't feel right because the rules. So, yep. Is it moved and seconded? All in favor? Aye. Abstentions?

Abstain.

Opposed? Chair votes aye, motion passes. Thank you. Discussion items, Dustin, who was I think on the road for a housing or is Kevin filling in?

I think the answer is yes. Justin is attending remotely from Central Oregon and Mr. Liberty is here with us in person.

I did not say, the monitors are not on, is that? Okay, so it's not an oversight. Okay, good.

Take it off folks, take it away. Thank you, Mayor and Councillors. This is just a quick update on the status of the development code update project. Going to start with a brief background refresher before getting into the current status and next steps. You're probably familiar with this slide. Purpose of the update, we're trying to make the code easier to use.

Sorry, I would like to see the slide or shall we look in the packet, Kevin?

Let's share the screen.

I think we will have it on the screen in a moment if we can brain our necks. I just am realizing it's so much worse for you, Amanda. You have like a super bad neck situation over there compared to Anna. Here we go. Mayor, let's try it again.

Thank you. Again, brief background refresher before we'll get into current status and next steps. As noted on the cover sheet for this agenda item, you'll find this in pages 93 to 95 of your packet. Code update has been a council priority since 2022. It's a comprehensive code reorganization and modernization. The intent is to maintain consistency with adopted policies, respond to changing state requirements, and ensure consistency with state law. We'll resolve a variety of internal conflicts and some missing pieces in the code, and we intend to improve the formatting and readability. The phase one code audit was funded entirely by DLCD through a grant. It included public engagement and outreach. It included a diversity, equity, and inclusion assessment. A draft audit report was completed in July of 2024 and presented to the council, discussed by council, then refined. And so that final version of the audit report came to us in October of 2024. That report summarizes areas of the code to update based on code audit findings and included recommendations for approaches to code updates where more than one approach is possible. But I found that we need to update definitions and standards, improve housing and quote unquote middle housing provisions, clarify procedures and review processes, address inconsistencies and gaps, and ensure clear and objective standards specifically for housing development. We kicked off work on the code update earlier this year. Current status, we are, Dustin and I, working with the consultant team to consolidate the four modules of code that were presented to Council and the Planning Commission. This includes addressing a variety of issues that were raised by the consulting team. We're trying to align the code with some new state requirements. We are incorporating provisions from the state's model code, which also happens to be going through a revision now to meet state requirements for housing. So Dustin and I, where we are right now, we're expecting to take on some additional staff work beyond what the consultant started with and the scope of work that we started with based on what we're seeing coming out of rulemaking and some other things that can't have a continued change to the goalposts for the consulting team. So we're going to do a little extra work ourselves. In any case, we intend to avoid conflicts with the latest legislation that is not addressed in the code audit. Bottom line, we're still working on it, but we're clearly behind schedule. You've seen this slide in the past. And I don't wanna sound like we are blaming the state for the delay, but here's an example of some of the challenges we're facing. In 2024, the legislature established the Housing Accountability and Production Office, that's HAPO. Among their intended functions and duties, HAPO provides technical support and assistance to local governments like us to help comply with housing loss. which include a long list of Oregon Revised Statutes and administrative rules. So the purpose of this particular memo that you see in front of you in June of 2025 was specifically to help us provide guidance related to state housing laws that affect land use planning. And we're not expecting Council to read all of this. I just wanted to give you a sense of and some of the complexity. These are pages one and two. These are pages three and four. There's a fifth page. You don't need to read this, obviously. It's just there's a lot going on, and we're doing our best to keep a handle on it. In this slide, you'll see where we think we are right now, including completing code consolidation and finalizing a draft code this summer, followed by a code adoption process this fall. The complete consolidated draft and it is probably going to require a contract amendment so we can add a couple of additional work sessions with the planning commission and city council. We'll schedule those work sessions, refine the draft code update, and then initiate that adoption process. That includes notice the DLCD and the public ballot measure, quote unquote, ballot measure 56 notice that tells people that we might be reducing their property values and affecting property rights, variety of things that are required through state law when we initiate a code update process like this. We will continue to coordinate to meet those state requirements and move the process forward. And that's where we are at the moment. Set this up for questions and Dustin again is standing by. And Dustin, do you have anything else you want to add right now before we get into questions?

Yeah, thanks, Scott. Thank you, Mayor, Council. Again, we're posting up in Redmond, Oregon right now to speak with Housing Oregon, their central conference. We have the opportunity to speak on a joint moderated panel with HAPO. And so some of those questions that we're grappling with now are also questions of greater concern to the housing industry. And I think... know really looking back at the past 10 years you've seen some rather unprecedented um changes initiated state level again um as a reminder to all our our viewers the the planning program that we operate is the state of oregon's planning program you just get to implement it locally sometimes how you see fit and sometimes uh It's in the manner in which the state finds fit. Those last 10 years, we've seen really unprecedented changes by way of middle housing. Some of the cone changes that we were working on are changes that and major policy shifts that you will implement regardless of whether you want to or not. So some of the challenges are making sure that those changes really fit with the rest of the code. Some of these new updates at the state level haven't been thought out really in terms of context of a larger code set. So the effort right now is to making sure that they fit. In the past, You know, just even recently, you know, July 1st, you're going to have a law on the books that basically says all housing is going to be approved. You shall not have a hearing. And the only person who will get to appeal is the is the applicant. That's a major shift in how we've conducted business and the parties that have standing that that's coming on. And so needing, you know, issues such as that have major implications. major implications in terms of people who get to participate. At what point in the decision process do they get to participate, if at all? And those are some of the things that really came out of your stakeholder and interested party groups. They wanted to know, what is the process? What is... the place where they can participate. And that sea change has just occurred. That came out of a short session. And so we're seeing these real-time changes that have meaningful impact on our code that we're trying to write. And we're trying to capture them all so that we can do this in the best way possible and not have a code that is immediately antiquated and inconsistent with state law the day we adopt it. And that has proven to be quite a feat. So... I think we're doing great. I think we have a lot of work to do. Thank you for adopting a budget that does include some additional funds for this effort, including the additional workshops that we're going to hold with Planning Commission as well as Council. We added a couple on there knowing how kind of the gravity of this and actually the work that's going to go into it. So we wanted to just really acknowledge that it's going to be a lot of work on your part and We wanted to make sure that we gave you ample opportunity to have questions. So this is really some of that pre-opportunity. We will follow up with workshops. we'll end up with about eight to 10 council appearances on this from the modules that you've looked at in the past, the consolidated code that's gonna come before you. And then really after that, a legislative process to adopt the code. So a lot of work has gone into it, a lot of work ahead. Kevin has been, really pushing hard to make sure that we're staying on track and capturing all these things and being really thoughtful, not only about the housing questions, but making sure that this thing is a useful document, that the people here are represented the best they can through its adoption. So that's my add-on.

I'm intrigued by something you said, Dustin. My sense of things is that here in Oregon, land use decisions are super appealable. There's quite a low barrier to entry for an individual citizen, especially a retired lawyer, individual citizen to appeal kind of a big project. And then there we go, or there we in fact don't go. Did I hear you at all right? And if we are becoming a little bit less appealable, does that kind of bring us towards this sort of mean median for like other states or are we suddenly going to be the state where, boy, you can't chime in at all about what your neighbor's doing?

think uh you know i've worked in a number of other states uh you're right oregon's process allows i would say one of the lowest bars to appeal and an opportunity for the individual to to step in uh and it kind of exact its rights uh and it's standing in the process um this is proven to be You know something that the legislature, the state legislature is found to be troubling, especially when it comes to affordable housing affordable housing is often on a funding schedule that is you know is. is pretty time sensitive. And I think there's a big vulnerability there in terms of affordable housings. An appeal, even if an appeal is upheld and all the rules were followed can be really detrimental to that federally and state funded housing that is on that timeframe. And I think that vulnerability, this is a plug to eliminate that, but I think the state has gone even further in in really kind of calling all housing pretty sacred at this point. And yeah, I think this comes on July 1st and I don't know how it will play out, but it's a major sea change by saying now the only applicant will be the only body to appeal housing related land use decisions. So, I mean, that's whether we're now on par with the rest of the lower 48. It's a radical change for Oregon itself.

Thank you. And then quickly, super interested in what you said about something 56, measure 56, about a taking, right? Does anyone make the case that having good protections and good rules and a robust, diverse community benefits all of our housing prices and therefore it's a gain and not a loss? Or has that argument not been put forward?

That argument hasn't been written into state law the way the other argument has been.

Thank you. Other questions, comments for the first half? Grant and then Anna.

I don't know if you necessarily want to answer this question, given that Oregon is changing its law and changes it every once in a while, every short period of time. would it behoove council to think more proactively in advance of the state in practically thinking about its own planning development code and get out ahead of the state in as much as it can in its thinking and proactively address a lot of development code work more proactively in thinking about it, come up with some more proactive development code plans. So we're front running the state in a way of speaking.

I think, yeah, I think absolutely. And you have in the past. And now we have to fix some of that. So, for example, when we adopted the middle housing code, that was not a code that was required to be adopted by the city. The city got out in front of that issue on its own initiative and actually beat the state to having that code in place. uh subsequently the state has changed its rules that are now pre will preempt those so we have to go back and fix rules that i think uh personally i think you know with with some amount of bias um we have a better code set that's easier and and makes more sense to use and is actually tracks a lot better is more user friendly and I now have a state code that is going to preempt it, so I have to fix it. I also see some state legislation coming through. It's in rulemaking right now. It's called MORE legislation, M-O-H-R. That starts to impact some of the work that we've done also in middle housing for pre-approved plans that we're going to have to reconcile. So I always say, yeah, we should not just be chasing the state. you know, I believe that, you know, we should be, you know, trying to chart our own initiatives and when, you know, write those to see to, as we see fit, but the state can come in and change things even to be less progressive than what you have. And I have to fix it and I have to reconcile those. So I, I, I don't think that's caused to ever stop trying to work forward, but you know, when you have preemptive laws that you have to, that you have to match it, It creates situations.

They can, but if we've already gone through and made a good amount of progress, let's say, and things already exist in a certain way, then they already exist in a certain way. So if we've already made a good amount of progress, and they make the law to perhaps change things to not in a way that the collective of Hood River... wishes them to be and it's too late and we already have a town that we like, then oh no, the state made things that we don't really like. We already have perhaps a town that we really like. So for example, should the state choose to act in a way that we don't wish? But if we're more proactive in actually thinking about these things as a council in advance and developing that more proactively, that's perhaps something that we can actually do. So, thanks.

My one concern on that too is, you know, when we have state legislation that undercuts what we've done, that we've been proactive on, you know, for me, that's frustrating. And I think that's frustrating to the people that we talk with and we hear from. You know, we spend... And you spend political capital hearing from people. We get excited about it. We advertise. We bring people in. We do the work. We start to get it rolling. And then that legislation becomes kind of limited by kind of, I would call it more fragmented. generic um legislation that often you know limits some of the the effectiveness and i think that's as practitioner and for the city you know that that is frustrating to me that we we do the things that the counselor is talking about we get out in front of it and all of a sudden our we end up with watered down approaches that hurt what we get after. And it hurts the confidence of the people that come and speak with us, especially when some of these things come from out of state, or excuse me, out of the county and from the state, and they've never got an opportunity to speak to those. And I think that's a real struggle. And that's actually a struggle I'm going to talk about tomorrow with our friends at HAPO and local implementation. Yeah.

Anna and then Gladys, I think.

I'd like to understand a little bit better if the end of the year fall approval deadline is a hard deadline that we have for some reason, or if it's something that we can push a little bit. Because I think it makes a lot more sense to try to take our time and write something that you guys don't have to go back and address later, given that things are changing. Plus, the memo that we received said that there's been that the process has been structured to provide multiple opportunities for community engagement. But I've done some checking. We had two interviews, one in 2024, like June, July 2024, with a group of people. And I'd like to better understand how those folks were individuals were selected. And then we had one late last year, right around the holidays. And I saw that there was a public informational video. I went and looked at that. It was posted in September of 2025. And as of today, I don't think counting my view, there's been 62 views. So I think in addition to some changes that are happening at the legislative and state level, does it make sense for us to just kind of so that we're doing it carefully, methodically, making sure that we're getting input from the actual people in our community that are using this code and making sure that it fits with what the state is changing. So all that to say, is December a hard deadline?

I don't think it's a hard deadline, Counselor. We do have a contract with the consulting team and there was an anticipated end of project date. We certainly can work with them as needed. I would, I guess, remind you that When we started the project, we really did talk about a policy neutral set of code amendments. And so the scope of work for the project was set up in a manner where maybe the amount of public engagement isn't as robust as you might expect it if we were going through a lot of big policy changes. What we're talking about now is the state has kind of created some policy changes for us. and regardless of engagement with the community we're going to need to move forward with some of those changes to meet state requirements and avoid litigation and other challenges so short way of saying i think we could extend the process we would need to discuss that with the consulting team dustin

Yeah, I think Kevin's right. We did a series of interested party interviews, and I think there was two tranches of them, but I think they were over... Do you recall, were they 12 each? In terms of number of participants or... No, we had a number of groups.

So we initially spoke with council about groups who might be appropriate for us to interview, who would bring different perspectives to the table, those including housing developers, affordable housing developers specifically, long list. And we've got this documented for you, of course. We reached out to a lot of folks. We didn't necessarily have everybody participate. So the list of people who actually were in those interviews may be shorter than you would expect or desire. But I think we did get a pretty good amount of feedback from those who did participate representing a variety of different interests. So I feel like the information that we got out of the code audit was It's quite helpful. And the direction that we've gotten early in this process for the code update from stakeholder groups and from topic of the week questions have been helpful and informative as we've been working on the code update. Clarence, do you mind if I reply? Sure.

I just want to express a different view. And I hear you. Of course, we want to have the input. To my daily operation, this has been so careful and so methodical. And in my opinion, we lose engagement because people are like, oh my God, this is going to take until 2028. And so slowing down also has a cost. to me in terms of it's difficult to motivate people to engage with something that seems so glacial, no offense to the glacial process. So I just, I'm not dying to push it out. Gladys and then Ben.

Also, if memory serves, I believe that there's more public engagement on the timeline because there's a public hearing, I believe at the end of it, which involves module four, I thought there was, but I know there's more coming down the pike in terms of engagement.

So as we consolidate those four modules of code and try to address some of these other issues coming from the state, anticipate bringing a consolidated document back to the planning commission and city council. The initial scope of work for the project just had one work session with each body before then finalizing a code update document, a draft code. that would then be presented through a code adoption process, public hearings by the Planning Commission and Council. And what we're talking about with the consulting team right now is adding two more Planning Commission work sessions, two more City Council work sessions. So we can do kind of a broad overview of what we have worked on in a first work session and then get into some of the details in following work sessions, again, refining that final code document before it is made available for the hearing process.

Okay, I had two questions, but something that you mentioned, now I have three. You mentioned planning commission meetings and council work sessions. Are those separate or maybe is one of them combined so that it's both groups meeting at the same time?

This time things are scoped for separate work sessions by the planning commission and council. And then once we get into the code adoption process, the sequences, planning commission meetings, public hearings, make a recommendation to council, ordinance adoption through council. So right now we don't have it scoped for joint meetings, but certainly could discuss that with the consulting team.

Yeah, I don't know how my peers feel about that, but I would be open to having a meeting or a work session with the planning committee as well so that we can hear each other's thoughts. So maybe just combining one of those meetings so that it's all of us. You know, I hear what you're saying, Councillor Cavalieri, and It sounds like you're gonna go back to the consulting team to understand what is within their scope. Sounds like there may be some updates to that scope. And then in addition, what staff is actually able to do in order to meet this deadline for the end of this year. In regards to some of the middle housing Oregon homes, I hadn't heard of that. But what I did find was that the city of Bend, for example, has five approved permit ready plans that are specific to ADU. And so I was curious if Dustin or Kevin, if you see the city replicating something like that when it comes to middle housing to the Moore homes?

Justin, you want to take that one?

Yeah, I got it. Yeah, on the ADU side, not to outdo Bend, the city of Eugene actually had competition for local architects, and I think they have almost 20 architects. prefab or pre-approved ADUs from Oregon Stamps that allow people to go back and buy at a discount and have them shipped to their site. I've been in contact with Eugene about that program. I've also been in contact and have a meeting next, of the many meetings I've had, another meeting next week with the City of the Dalles. We have a little different program. building code requirements just because where we are in the state, but some of those pre-approved ADUs is something we are definitely actively, I'm looking at it now, regardless of what the code does. So I don't need the code to fix anything in that. That's just a program that we're working on because it's a good idea. And I don't, it doesn't, doesn't really alienate the code or conflict with the code now. It's just another thing to do. So I like the idea. People are starting to do it. The state had intended to get pre-approved ADUs as well as a couple of single-unit dwellings off. That just continues to be on their to-do list. So the cities have started taking it upon themselves to do this work.

Thank you, I mean, it was a little bit to what Councilor Polson was getting to is what can we do to be proactive to try and get ahead and having, I'll look more into Eugene, that's really incredible to hear that they have up to 20 to really streamline the permitting process to make it more efficient, I'd say, for builders to build a variety of types of housing, especially those that we have prioritized. Earlier in this year, during the short session, there was the one-time expansion of the urban growth boundary. And it was specifically for homes that were for individuals that were 60 or older. Do you foresee that that is something that we, for example, could tap into? Whereas as you have a long list of items that you're looking right to potentially update based on the state, is that one of them?

That one's less of a good fit for us because the scenic area on the west side of town and on the east side dominated by high-value farmland. If we had an urban or a rural reserve or some sort of... not EFU, that would really give us a lot more opportunity to use it. I would look at it. The issue becomes it's one time, so you better make it count. And two, I think most of the underlying zone, which if you look at... you know, from the west side, west side middle over is really restricted. That would be the act of Congress and approval at Washington, D.C. to allow for that. And on the east side with the, you know, along Tucker Road, it's there's nothing really that's like ready to go or not ready to go. It's a lot of built out land and it's a lot of EFU. So, you know, when I look and, you know, dream of what could be that added area, it just really, we're really situated in a poor position to take advantage of that. We should always look at it, but just, I wish it would do something more for us than it could, but it really, we're just situated in such a bad opportunity to take advantage of that.

Great. Thank you both.

job. Thanks, Joe.

Thank you. We will be Oh, sorry. We will be back. We Kevin and I are working on the on consolidating this this and wrangling this beast to make it useful and to share with you. So we're we're excited to keep it going. There was a little bit of an absence between us and you. So I wanted to make sure that we had the opportunity to and for the people out there who are still paying attention and interested that that there's work ahead.

Thank you. That takes us to city manager comments.

Thank you, Mayor. Two quick things. I believe that we have planned, as we talked about, if you're interested in moving for a possible bond or bonds, that we have a housing town hall planned for the 23rd. Looking to see. Excellent. The day that'll be Tuesday the 23rd that will be here and that will be a panel discussion about housing and our needs in the community and then on the 29th following Monday. Also here we will be doing tours in an open house of the police station. So opportunity for the public to hear on both of those topics.

From my perspective, I've been hearing about those two dates on the radio quite a bit. So good job, them, us, whatever.

Excellent. Thank you. No other comments for tonight.

Committee reports, Anna.

Nothing for me.

Nothing for me.

MCAC didn't meet this last month, but we'll meet on the 23rd for Saruta. The plan is still to have some students or a student come out here August of this year. There is a trip that will take place with Hood River students going to Saruta in March 2027. The adult trip for the Saruta sister city will take place. The county will meet Monday, June 15th at 4 o'clock.

I'm sorry, Gladys. I was wondering, and then I saw Abigail wondering. Saruta, the grown-up, the 50th will be in March. Is that it?

Yes, yeah. That would take place next year in March 2027. So that's the adult trip. The students will come here in August of this year, and then we will host Saruta's student. They are looking for host families right now.

For what period of time that is?

for August of this year for the school year.

Yeah, so for a whole year, yeah.

And then HRV students will travel to Saruta in August as well of this year, just for a short trip, a couple of days, and they'll come back. And like I mentioned, the March 2027 trip is for the adults. Thanks. Yeah, county will meet next Monday at 4 o'clock, and that's it for me.

Thank you. Doug?

Nothing for me. Rick?

Just in case anybody forgot, Moffett Creek on 84, both directions, closed until, not closed, down one lane until the fall, so all through summer. So if you're headed into Portland or over here, Will, it's going to be a delay around Moffett Creek. So pack some extra time into your travel that direction or back.

Can you repeat the date you said tomorrow?

Moffett Creek. now until fall yeah every day all the time 20 24 7 365 until fall so all summer long is that different than what's been going it's the same as what's been going on but okay so still could still happening Just, yeah, still happening. Just continues to happen. Yeah, they got delayed. ODOT got delayed a little bit on the steel delivery for the bridge, but it's on the way. Just in case anybody forgot how long that's going to continue to get built. It's going to be through fall. So all through summer. Thank you. You're welcome.

Anything else, Grant?

Just a ball of sunshine for everyone. You're welcome, everyone. That was it from the Region 1 Act meeting for updates that were relevant here. That's it. Amanda?

I did have an Energy Council meeting last week where we approved a new two-year work plan, which is exciting. We talked about having more regular updates from the governing body participants, so that might be something that I do in the future. um and there's like some e i think it's well it's e-tip i think it's a grant something but um pretty big one i think uh that they are getting help from the national labs which i don't really know what that means but but for modeling potential loss and emergencies so we can invest in like resilience and backup plans. And then working on the energy resilience plan, which is also from a grant. It's due June 30th, so it's almost done, but basically that is... evaluating currently our scenario and then with a goal to improve energy resilience and increase energy independence. So that's almost done. The end. Thank you.

Circling back to our public testimony today, I heard Mr. Perrin request that we give him notice so that he can bring advocates to express their opinion. And when it comes around, I'm confident that we will be doing that. Is everybody good with that? Follow up from our public testimony? I'm involved in a fun, what do you call it when you write back and forth? almost pen pals, a correspondence, that's what I'm trying to say. There was an article in the Oregonian last week that said, Hillsborough's thinking about restricting data centers. They're the first city in Oregon. No one has done it. And I was like, wait a minute. So I like called Abigail. I'm like, we did that, right? And Doug, like, anyway, I wrote them a nice letter from Mayor Paul and Mike Rogoway, business reporter, emailed me back. And so we're like corresponding and he's asking questions. So good job us. We were a little bit like on the au courant topic there. So- Yeah. Nothing else for me. Council comments. Amanda?

I don't have anything.

Grant?

While we're talking about streets, if you guys want a fun case study, you can read about Hoboken, New Jersey. On streets? Yeah. Parking and streets.

Oh, parking.

Okay. Yeah, they... 15 years ago, 10 years ago, Vision Zero was a thing. A bunch of cities did it. Hoboken, New Jersey decided to just put basically plastic bollards around town, super cheap. They had no major injuries or deaths there since. Wow. Self-funded, super cheap. So if you don't want to read the case study, you can read the case study. Doug. Doug.

uh attended first friday for pride just want to say happy pride month that's all for me

Yeah, happy Pride Month. World Cup starts in a couple days. First game is on the 11th at noon. That is Mexico versus South Africa, and the U.S. plays on the 12th at 6 p.m. I'll echo the housing open house that we have. I had an opportunity to create some PSAs for both of those on the radio with Tim, and that was a lot of fun, so thank you.

Yep, it was that first Friday, though, working. And yeah, great attendance. I think it's always kind of one of the best ones that happens, so yeah.

was fun i watched it from my window i was working and then i got to see the end of the party but it was really fun to see um i just wanted to say thank you to abigail and to dan for getting um the campbell property donation finalized it's been recorded and abigail said that was done i'd like to know um what the next steps are going to be for designating and dedicating the and then constructing the trail easement because i think that that's pretty exciting so i'm really curious to hear more about that That's all I've got.

Thank you, Anna. I mean, there's groundbreaking and there's ribbon cutting. There's almost nearly like I want to have like a ceremonial, like since I've lived here 26 years, we've been like, oh, the trail, the Campbell, like we own the Campbell property easement. Like that's fantastic. I want to like go out there with like a snow cone or something.

Yeah.

Oh, I can certainly look into providing a press release, at least letting folks know that the city has now acquired that property. And then I will follow up with our planning staff to find out what the next steps are regarding the placement. I think I had shared that the easement is pretty broad because we don't know exactly what the topography of the area is and where the trail would need to be. I assume that'd be kind of a planning process that we'll need to work through later. I don't know that we have a timeline for that, but we definitely have a milestone in that we're just another important step closer to the trail.

So I'm kind of HAB-Masyn Moyer- Or will we be working with the parks district because they they have the trail that next on either end.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- They should definitely connect.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- yeah yeah definitely yeah we want the trails. HAB-Masyn Moyer- yeah and then we have we acquired the property, but the easement is just kind of broad we don't actually have the easement yet is that right.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- We have i'm gonna see if destinance online here.

No, we have the easement. We have the easement in place.

We don't have the exact placement of where the trail would go.

We have a conservation easement over nine acres, and then we have a dedicated within said easement, the right to construct a trail within certain parameters. The easement isn't a... As mentioned, it's a floating easement, so we have access to be a little more nimble. When I first looked at the plans that were provided, I was not satisfied that the proposed location was going to work. So we worked on getting something that has the flexibility to lay it over almost anywhere on that property as it's a pretty dynamic piece. But we do have a right and an easement in place. Recorded with Hood River County.

That it's now in public ownership is so exciting. I mean, of course, we all want to walk on it, but that's also a step. But public ownership of the easement, hooray.

Sorry, I'm confused again. Do we own the property? Like we own title to the property. There is a conservation easement on the property, meaning that it can't be developed. And then there's separate from that, a trail easement that is currently floating that will connect. So is that right? I believe so.

The conservation easement includes the trail easement. So like within, there's like a global conservation easement that includes the holder's rights. And we are the holder of the conservation easement. We have a right to construct a trail in the manner in which we see fit. within certain confines so uh that is essentially the easement for the trail built into that conservation easement that covers the entire property so rather than a 50-foot swath that is laid out in a geographic area we have basically covered the whole piece with the conservation easement and a right to build a trail easement thank you got it we're still on you anna anything else for comments that's really great news that's it that's all i have

I think that brings us to the end. Am I in order? Urban renewal, thank you. I will now pause the City Council and hand it over to Chair Stapina for urban renewal.

Thank you, Mayor. I will call to order the Hood River Urban Renewal Agency meeting. I'm assuming no agenda additions or corrections. None. Thank you. Any business from the audience online, Jen? Thank you. Okay, the first item on here is the consent agenda. Any discussion about the consent agenda before our motion? I would entertain a motion.

Move to approve the consent agenda.

First by Grant.

Second.

Second by Ben. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Chair votes aye. Consent agenda passes. Next we have a public hearing. I have a script. Should I start with that, Will? Okay. This is the time scheduled for a public hearing regarding the approved budget for FY 2026 27. For the Hood River Urban Renewal Agency. We will now take public testimony city recorder has anybody registered to speak or provide written testimony. Hearing that there has been none. The public hearing on the fiscal year 2026 2027 approved budget is now closed. Well,

Yeah, thank you, Chair Stapina. Members of the URA Board, the proposed budget was reviewed by the URA Budget Committee on May 13th and approved as proposed. The approved budget coming under the Budget Committee were the Columbia Cascade District and Waterfront Districts prioritizing funds prioritization and delivery of final investments ahead of the closure of those districts. The Heights District funds the first three projects, taking the first three projects of the Heights Streetscape Plan to full design and construction documents. The Westside District continues to fund the Modest Housing Construction Incentive and moves forward the Mount Adams Roundabout design plan. And then for the general fund of the URA through contracts with the city, working on exploring the city's next housing investment, supporting the November public safety and housing bond information and engagement campaign, and also operating the city's moderate income revolving loan program. So those are the highlights of the FY27 budget. So if there are no amendments, there is a suggested motion adopting the approved budget in your packet.

Okay. Any questions for Will? If there are no, go ahead, Grant.

Is it URA budget 03 or 02? Thank you for that.

The motion says two, but in the- 03, the supplemental budget coming up later tonight is 02.

Any further clarifications, questions? Then if someone would like to make a motion, there is a suggested motion. Just make sure you amend it to 2026 URA-03. Anyone like to make a motion?

I move to adopt resolution number 2026-URA-03, adopting a budget for fiscal year 2026-27. Moved by Grant. Second.

Second by Paul Blackburn. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Chair votes aye. Budget passes. Thank you all. IGA.

Yeah, thank you. So we have an amendment to the IGA with the city for administration of citywide programs by the agency. As a reminder, this is a catch-all amendment IGA that just covers cost plus 10% for projects that the ERA does on behalf of the city where that funding structure makes sense. If that funding structure does not make sense, projects can be covered by a separate IGA. That was approved a couple months ago, but there was a request to add an Exhibit A, just keeping track of all the projects that had been approved and their amounts. That amendment has already been approved by the city. This is now just coming back to the URA board to also approve that same amendment. Again, only adding the exhibit A.

Any questions for Will about that? Gladys? Um, so I had a question about the bond and how, how does that project like shift staffing, given that a lot of the work around the height streetscape plan was taking place. So how does the staffing, uh, capacity change with the bond as well?

Uh, well, it's just me.

Right. That's what I'm asking.

Yeah. I just have to fit it all in. Yeah. As best I can. Yeah.

Any other questions? City Council Chambers, There is a suggested motion on page 11.

City Council Chambers, and move that urban renewal agency authorized the agency administrator to sign the provided intergovernmental agreement amendment for urban renewal administration of city wide project and and thank you. City Council Chambers, Diana.

City Council Chambers, Second second by grant any further discussion all those in favor. City Council Chambers, post their votes I and. We have one more, the resolution URA-02 this time.

Yeah, and this supplemental budget is for now this current fiscal year, FY25-26. This is a year-end cleanup item, ensuring that we have appropriations for all approved activities. So the primary item is budgeting for both receipt and expenditure funds from the city for the information and engagement campaign. And then also just while we're doing this, I also cleaned up unused appropriation for the modest housing construction incentive because we did not receive any applications this year. And those are the only two items for resolution 2026 URA-02.

And the URAC recommended passing, correct? Yes, thank you. Any questions for Will about this? Anna.

I had a distinction between, you said modest housing construction incentive and then there's the middle housing construction incentive. Is it the same thing?

It is the same thing. We changed the name this year because it used to be tied to the use of the middle housing code. It was essentially if you use the middle housing code, then you're deemed to have met the criteria for the grant. We decoupled from that just to make it a flat dollar amount and also then just a flat Size requirement I will stare staff to based on number of bedrooms, but we still promote them middle housing code as a really powerful tool for builders of smaller housing, but we don't Directly tie this grant to its use.

Okay. Thanks.

Other questions for well Not there is a suggested motion on page 14 of the packet.

I move the urban renewal agency board adopt resolution 2026-URA-02, a supplemental budget for fiscal year 2025-26. Moved by Grant.

Second. Second by Ben. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Chair votes aye. Motion passes. Anything in terms of comments from you today, Will?

Yeah, just three updates. I received information from ODOT that the jurisdictional transfer for our 281 has received all its necessary signatures. And so the roadway will be ours on July 1 at noon.

Fantastic. Congratulations.

Oh, yeah. Also received a confirmation letter from Business Oregon documenting that our SB 1530 funds, that was I think the $2.3 million that supported Mariposa Village, they have deemed that project complete and documented that all terms and conditions have been met. So we're fully closed out there. So that's great news. And then also just let you know that I will be presenting on the moderate income revolving loan fund or loan program to the Hood River County Board of Commissioners on June 15th on a Wednesday to let them know what that program is all about and get the ball rolling on an IGA for them to do the tax collection portion of the program.

Awesome. Merle, question in glass.

I want to make sure that I heard you correctly. It could be that I misheard you. You said June 15th, but then you said Wednesday. Monday, right? Monday. Okay, cool. My apologies.

Any questions for Will about the administrator updates? Thanks. If anybody has anything to say, Paul?

I was reading a 30 year old newspaper this week and there was kind of a lot of chatter about the urban renewal agency. And I want to pause to celebrate the fact that this structure we have now makes so much sense for many years. It was comprised of not the city council and but the other people who would like perch on the end and it was so defacto us anyway and we made that change a few years ago and it's a good idea. So I'm glad that we have this good structure for this good tool.

Hear, hear. Any further comments? All right, with that I'll close out the Hood River urban renewal agency board meeting and return it to mayor Blackburn to close out the city council meeting.

I'll resume city council and anything for the good of the order. We are adjourned. Thank you.