City Council - Regular Meeting

I guess. Okay, I'm going to call this meeting of the Lafayette City Council to order. Please rise for the excellent. I pledge algiance to the flag of the states of and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Can you please take ro at that? Carwell present. Go here. Thank you.

Counc. Okie dokie. Um um citizen input. So I do have some signed up. So my calling name if you'll um come up and just restate your name for the record but uh Valerie Parson go first. Marilyn Duval. Thank you Madam Mayor.

Hello Councilman. I'm here to talk about veterans dog part today. My understanding, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that you have approved a 70 foot flag pole plus um the uh necessary um monument that you're going to have to veterans in that park. Correct. Well, go ahead and do your and then we can

Well, it and we'll apply to that. That is a commercialsized flag. I did some research. It can be a real noise nuisance unless you have safeguard on that flag. The safeguards would mean that you would have an internal howiard, the rope inside that the size and type of rope would be safe for the wind. Other safeguards have been met because this is a is a residential area. There are houses on both sides. This is only two city lots back to back. It's a small part. And then I understand you're putting a 5ft walkway through it. I'm asking for the dog serving. But most of all, the noise nuisance is a real factor for us. Plus the slats. I know you've received a letter that I participated in and I'm just going to ask you please to reconsider the size of that flag for the noise factor alone and also the $150,000 that you're spending for that particular project seems a little out of sight considering we need so much in the community including something for our young people which we do not have. Thank you ladies and gentlemen.

So usually thank you Marilyn. Usually you know we receive your information and then follow up but because all four of those things have been things recently discussed in council meetings I'm just going to quickly answer them. Council please correct me if I'm wrong. The poll we're looking at 70 could be smaller. And we have already talked about internal ratings and all that but that's good feedback for the noise. um the slats. We've already discussed with you that it was in the um plan

the plan because our um those that were designing it were being proactive assuming that privacy would be wanted. But that since the majority of you guys didn't want it, cool, we don't have to spend the money. But it's still in the design because we're not going to hear or not. Yeah. And I'm pretty sure we already talked about that the walkway is not going through the whole park. It's just going from one entrance to the monument which is on one end and the other entrance just in long enough to a bench so that handicapped 88 can use it. It's not not the whole bench. It's not going down the long way. Okay. Okay.

And then the 150 is everything without the light. Did you get a grant for that or No, we're going out for it. We're we're still evaluating. But the 150,000 is everything to develop the park besides the five pole. You know, as being a large part of the ELCAT group,

our mission is to do things for the city, but we're not vested in this particular project. We would like to do things that would when you drive through Lafayette, what do you see? We'd like to see more done in the city itself to make our city a city that you want to come to. Enough said. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. So, council, if there's any followup you want or need from Brandon or them, please do. Um, next is Valerie Parsons. Okay. What else? Um, Leah Harper. It's Parkite.

It is. So the park on six um sorry 15th in Grant there's community little community pride and there's been a broken slide there for many many months and I guess you're aware of it. I'm just I'm just questioning if they're going to fix it when it's okay because it's I'm thinking summer's coming. It seems like it's been broken since last summer. So all right. So my understanding another quick answer because it's a good answer. Um Greg and Brandon correct me if I'm wrong. It's been broken for about two months because they've been doing everything they can to find a slide that will fit. Okay. They couldn't. So now we're at the point of trying to find a new playground that will fit that footprint existing without it was an inexpensive cost. All right. So,

right. I believe something's coming to us in the next month or whatever for council to approve. Okay. Thank you. Look at that first. Okay. Um, I do have one to read, but before I read it in, any last calls to people in the audience? Brandon, do we have a copy of the comment that's about to be read? Can we just submit it to the record and pergo the reading? The person asked me to read it aloud. I'm going to move that we just entered into the record and order the reading. I'll second that. Okay. I have on the table a motion. Um, Denny, can you call a vote? Councelor Bson. Hi. Councelor Creswell.

Hi. Councelor Burroughs. Hi. Councelor K. Hi. Councelor Matthew. Hi. Councelor G. Hi. Okay. Motion passes. The record. Um because this isn't in the packet. Please make sure it's put in. Okay. Um next up, additions or deletions from the agenda. I do have one quick one. Brandon's aware of and he asked me to um bring it to you guys is just a like 5-second conversation about a possible movie in the night a movie in the park. So if you guys are okay with that where do you want to put it?

Let's just do discussion 7D. It just be it's just a budget question. So that okay with that any other additions or deletions? Okay, moving on. on consent agenda. So just looking for a motion unless there move to approve the February 20 February 12th, 2026 council meeting or consent agenda. I'll second. Okay. Uh Kennedy, can you please call vote for an approval of the consent agenda? Council. Councelor Mackey. Hi. Councelor Ding.

Hi. Councelor Carwell. Hi, Councelor Carson. Hi. Okay, motion passes. Consent agenda approved. Moving on to discussion items. Um, the first one is 7A, purchase of a fire engine. Um, granted, you staff.

All right. Um, so I'm not going to read to you everything that's in the agenda, but um, as you guys could see, I'm here to ask for the purchase or being able to be purchased for our next budget cycle, a new engine um, to replace engine 101. Um, this is something that we've had on the uh I guess plan to replace for the last few years and we've kind of held off on it um just because there was other things that needed to happen. So, um we kind of held off doing that. However, um now I think it's about time that we do get that done. And part of the reason I would like to get this done is our engine 101 is a 99 freight liner. Um, it currently has uh 200 or 27,000 miles uh on it, which is very low. However, it has 225,000 idle hours on it. There's a equation that works out uh to about 30, you take 30 times uh the idle hours and it works out that in actual odometer miles um because that's still moving as it's idling. Everything's still moving as it's pumping. Um, it works out to it has about 94,000 miles on it. Um, it is a 99, so it is a lot of the parts on there are obsolete. We're having a hard time trying to replace parts and pieces off of there. Um, and we're getting kind of to the point where it's just going to be a constant having to replace things. And so looking to replace uh that this year. Um, the reason I'm coming to you now is because the cost of new fire engines is going up and continuing to go up. Um, they're losing more and more

manufacturers, so we're getting less uh manufacturers that are able to do this. Um, for example, uh, and you can find this on just about any news site that you go on to there. It's all over the place. Um there have been in the last four years about a 64% increase in the cost of fire engines. So um in 2022 the average cost of a fire engine is about $550,000. That exact same engine with everything equal in today's price is about $915,000.

Um so it's quite the increase. Um, and even in the last 24 months, um, let's see, in 2024, uh, there was an pumper that was purchased for 717,000 plus about 15,000 in upfitting. Um, that same thing, exact same thing priced out, speced out today is, uh, in 2025 was $215,000 more. Um, I did talk to the rep that I got the quote from and he did say that um, the current quote that we have or the the engine that they have in stock currently is um, expected to go up um, somewhere around 120 to 180 for the next model that comes out for the exact same thing.

When does that model come out? next year. Okay. So, it is uh they're changing the transmission and the engine the one that you guys have now. They're changing. No, for well, yes, the one that we're looking at to purchase this year's models and next year's model to the model.

Um anyways, that's all the emissions. all that stuff will be new and then we'll have a firstg of all that stuff. And I don't know if you guys have noticed with the firstgens of most things, it becomes more of an issue and more of a problem. So that's why we're looking at trying to find something into this budget cycle that we can get prior to all of that happening. So did I miss anything, Brandon? No. No.

Um in in the financial impact. So, we're we're using one of the lower end the the lower cost item that he provided us. I know he also has another he also talked to the same manufacturer. It was one over $800,000 or so. I think this is more of a discussion if council wants to move forward. What stream should we look at budgeting for and start having those conversations with vendors. Um, obviously everything will have to be approved through the budget committee and through council, but if we feel if we have council support, hopefully we'll have budget committee support, but we at least need to start navigating how we want to start planning for that if the council would use it in the budget, but also through his contacts and saying, "Hey, we may be looking at something this we're looking at." Um, and maybe maybe be able to say if we're bringing more to the more to the table, we can kind of sweeten the pot on financing, etc. So, just wanted to kind of use some of the tools that we have to leverage um and the financial impact based on if you want to go this route and then um we can start working on the background and make this happen for the next fiscal year.

I had two questions. One being with a new model coming out, is this kind of a situation with like the new iPhones, the brand new model comes out where then this model goes down in price?

Um there is the possibility of that happening. However, um most manufacturers right now um if there is it's taking for a customuilt engine, it's taking anywhere from 3 to seven years to get that once the order is put in. Um if you get what's called a stock, which is kind of what this one is that I I asked for, um it's a lot less time frame. However, um I think they were saying it would be about 18 to 24 months with with a stock. However, um lost my train of thought for a second.

How much does it cost to accessorize? Yeah, it will be more accessorized cost to it. But um sorry, go with your question one more time so I can remember. Does the cost kind of go down versus

um so where I was going with that is uh most of the apparatus that are coming out as soon as they come out uh on stock like these they get bought up fairly quickly because departments all over the country are dealing with this exact same thing. And so, um, if it's a decent price or a cheaper price than that million dollar mark, everybody's after it. So, they become really competitive to try and get a hold of. Um, for example, I looked at a used uh 2024 um, engine not too long ago. I called to just get some information on it and uh the very next day I got a message back from them saying that it had already been sold and it had just gone on their website. So yes, they might go down in price but

it might not be available. It might not be available to you. And then my second question is the current model that we have um is there any resale value either for parts or just there is there is a resale value but we're from what I've done some preliminary research on we're looking at probably less than 100,000 for it but um we would be able to get something back out of it. Okay. And then the hope was that we would all replenish back into the fire capital fund to be prepared for future fire capital um items that come up. And then we have 700,000 in reserves. So this Yes. What gets added this fiscal year to the reserves?

I would we probably have to top it off at probably around 60 to 60 to 80,000 based on premium numbers based on what he gets and maybe the financing structure we want to go. What do we usually put in there for surf? Um, I'll pan I want to say we did 45 last year. Okay. So, right. Okay. So, in my mind, if we can replace the engine for 700 plus 45, $745,000, that's fine. But then the reserves are down until the old one sells. So,

it won't be a we would be depleting our funds, which is why I give a third option of the hybrid approach, giving maybe and I know we don't want to create debt. I know this council's against creating debt, but I worry about depleting the fire capital issues. If something else were to happen in the fire side, we would have to then Yeah. No, I I agree with that. But if the fire if the fire chief thinks that's the right approach, we'll take it into consideration, right? But I mean, it's to me we have 700,000. We should have another 45,000 in reserves this year. So, we have $745,000. We want to spend it all on one engine. That's, you know, a discussion to have with fire chief. But um I'm you've you've known me for a long time now. Financing is not something I'm on board with. I know I just brought the out.

Speaking of the reserves, is there another piece of large equipment or anything coming up that you anticipate in the next two to three years that would need to be replaced? No. Uh engine 10 would be the next one that would have to be replaced, right? Yeah, that one we could probably we'll get by for quite a while longer with that one. Well, it's a 2014 and the other one is a 1999. So, as long as parts are available, it is 15 years. What do you think? Probably at least another 10 years, I would say. So, that's another consideration. 10 years at $45,000 a year in reserves. That's not going to replace that engine. Well, we've been talking about that every year that the fire reserve needs to be increased.

And that fire reserve is for more than just vehicles or is this just vehicle money? Yes. Is the 99 nickel in and diamond us already or are you thinking it will start soon?

Um it it has a little bit. Um we did have a governor control module that went out a while back and that was really hard for us to find to replace. Um, we did end up finding a part that we had to find and then we had to take it to uh a manufacturer, not a manufacturer, but a Freightlininer I think it was to get them to reprogram it so that it worked with the computer on the the engine. So,

and my concern of not of of if we waited is you were saying, you know, the prices are not just creeping up that if we hit that million dollar mark, it's not that I don't want the voters to have a say, that's going to slow it down because we're going to have to wait to put that out, right? So, uh I have a question. Have you um for with your formula, have you got a magic number of what we're looking for with mileage and use on the equipment that we're looking for? Uh what do you mean?

Well, I mean, what if we found a 2023 with 5,000 miles on it or a 2025 with 30,000? I mean, is is there is there um the the number of idle idle hours that you have on them? Is there something that you're looking to be under or or something for us to really look start digging into?

I mean, obviously the lower hours we can find on something, the better off we're going to be. Um, if you're looking at 2025, 2026 is if you can find them. Um, you know, low hour is what we're looking for on the the mile or the the hours. The miles should hopefully be low, but sometimes vendors take them all over the place to show them off. So they can sometimes get a little higher on the miles part, but overall that's what they're looking for is that the hours and miles together low. Yes, council.

Um I'm assuming that you have, but I'm going to ask anyway. Have you looked into any grants, any funding that comes from the that we can pull from the government to lower the cost? Um I'm assuming you have, but I'm just going to ask anyway. We have um we're always looking at grants for different things. Um but a lot of times grants we you know we can get a better shot at a grant if we can match it. But um again this is preliminary to see if this is something that you guys are interested in. So we're not going to dig too far into it unless it's something that you guys would support.

So I guess have to be um pretty quick, right? If they're selling fast, you know, we've gone through different housing markets. I can remember driving to look at a house is being sold to somebody else. So, it would have to be pretty quick. We would have to be ready to to go if we saw the right the right unit.

Well, we we would have to go out for bids because it's inc it's definitely more than the bid amount. So, we'd have to go out for bids. we would actually have to see what those bids come in. So we'd have to have it's it would probably be at least a three to four month process from getting the go ahead and that's just of us incorporating starting to incorporate into the budget looking at the numbers getting the approval and then we can't go from bids until we get formal the budget's formally approved. So, I mean, if in a perfect world, the council says yes, let's look at something to start putting towards the budget, bring to the budget committee, we probably won't get anything out there probably until August. We say, "Hey,

my thought is we should do that." As chief mentioned, it can take 18 to 24 months for a stock item. So the concern is if we're starting to experience problems now with the current engine, we keep pushing this off, where are we going to be at if we're now looking further down the road? Yeah. And I mean, there is, you know, there is fluidity in the general fund. We we have a healthy general fund, but then if we start taking additional money for it, it hurts savings, but but we've also budgeted for this and we have what we have set aside for it. So I guess the first question is is is council wanting to move forward with purchasing a new vehicle and then if so which avenue one two or three

I I think we need to move forward with it and I think yeah less finance the better but obviously we've had this discussion in the past with the budget this is an area that we need to increase moving forward especially accounting for the fact that maybe in the next 10 15 years there's going to be something else that needs to be replaced because if we don't raise it, we're going to have to finance and that's going to take money, too. It's not like But yeah, I I would agree with counselor Gilgan. It doesn't make sense to finance and waste money on interest.

Yes. So, I I'm I'm supportive of that. The time frame means that we don't want to wait till last minute. So, it's it's time. We knew it's time. This isn't the first time this has been put in our ear. and the less financing that's needed without, you know, shooting ourselves in the foot with everything else. The risk of being redundant, I don't see any reason to finance. We put money aside for it. There is money. I don't even think the least finance possible. It's we have cash. There's no need to finance. We put money aside for this.

So, the discipline of staying within our budget might be another thing. But at home, if I go over my budget for one thing, I got to pull from something else. And I don't think all of us sitting up here should impute things on the city that we don't want ourselves or constituents doing at their home budgets. So, from other budget or other funds with us, well, I mean I mean the the the fire department and the fire department reserves operate with from the general fund. Okay. So,

okay. I know water and sewer we can't. That's okay. So I guess the direction of the council is we have money in reserve. So if it's possible for us to try to stay in that budget, that's really the direction I think the council would want to take. If that gives helpful direction,

okay, any further comment, council, move on. Okay. Thank you, Chief. Okay. Um number 7B status update for city projects. So Brandon, I'll hand you Thank you, Madam Mayor. So, just wanted to give you a quick rundown. Um so, today we actually had our pre-bin meetings um for the headworks. We had one attendee show up. Uh he's been a contractor of ours who's done projects in the past. Um and we also had the Madison and Veterans at the same time, Veterans Park and Madison Street projects. Uh we probably had half a dozen or so people here for those each. Yeah, that was a pretty good turnout for those two.

Yeah. So, um and that was today. So, next next city council meeting, we will have those bids to be in front of you to accept those. Um we feel pretty good we'll get some sufficient bids on the Madison and uh the Veterans Park. The one one is going to be the Headworks. So, obviously it's just equipment. So, equipment providing is a little different than construction. So, um that's where we're at with that. Were some of the ones that came from Madison Veterans interested in both projects or was it completely separate? Not from what I seen. We kind of divided up and conquered because we held them both at the same time. Oh, okay. Gordon went to the Madison Street with the contractors that wanted to bid on that one.

I went to the Veterans Park with the contractors that wanted to uh live with the Veterans Park bid. Oh, okay. And it looked like it was

Yeah, it didn't look like we had any one contractor that was interested in both. And then uh lastly, I know we've talked about um updating our design standards because it's been forever. And so we did talk with Tetrate Tech and they're quoting it take about two years um and we're looking at about $30 to $50,000. So, with your blessing, I would like to look at putting about $30,000 in the next two fiscal years um to make that um obviously we do it in segments two and two. Um but it'll be about $60,000 on the top end to update our design standards for the city of Lafayette. So, I know I've talked about in the past. I just want to make sure that's something council is still looking at addressing.

Yeah. Yeah. Anyone else? Okay. Um and so yeah, so then next month Gordon will be here um to really talk about that. We feel pretty good. Um so yeah, any questions about that? No. Thank you. Thank you, Brandon. Okay. 7C Cany pump station grant. I'll hand that to you, Brandon.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. So um as of the publication of the um agenda, we had not received the word yet that uh we had received the money. Well, everybody knows by now we did receive that grant uh last week. Thank you so much for everybody for your support. Um and then Paul ticking with myself. Nice way to go. Nice job.

Well, thank you. Um it was a team effort, Greg, everybody involved, everybody from the community who's able to help out with previous support letters that we're able to convey over to this um legislative cycle. So, where we're pretty pretty much at now is we have to wait for Governor Kodic to sign the uh sign uh the bill. Once she signs the bill, we'll probably get some notification from the Business Oregon office because it is lottery funds if they're going to um if it's going to be looking later on in 2027 because trying to talk with Gordon to see when we would actually kick this off and it would say, "Okay, if everything went well, this is going to go to voters in November." So that'll be on the ballot and so we'll have um that ballot hopefully approved by voters if all goes well and then depending on when the lottery funds would be released. We're looking at sometime in the first half of 2028 is when we'd be able to break ground on the Canyon View pump station project. It wouldn't take more than a week or two, probably a month tops.

Yeah. No, it would it would definitely be done hopefully in the fiscal year of 2028. Um so it will be a slowmoving process because you do have to wait for state lottery funds. Um and so there may be a gap of getting getting out to voters and getting voter approval and then not starting for a year or so. So we just need to be mindful of that. Um and we do have the matching funds for the SD it will be an SD SDC funded project. So we'll have those funds and we'll have an estimation of those funds that will be able to go out. Um, so over the next uh few months we'll be I'll be working with the Secretary of State office and council on the language of the proposed battle language and then also we'll be doing some materials um and educations. We'll probably have to have a town hall, a virtual town hall and then obviously some education through community events that we do to kind of get out there for residents and I would also look towards the council too being out there talking to the community about that when they have those conversations. So,

any other questions? But yeah, yay. That was a fun celebration with Well, thank you all.

That that was I know that was the first time that you've navigated that. It was interesting to learn all the hoops that we had to keep jumping through. Okay, real quick. Um I don't like the walking things on, but this kind of just fell in our lap. Um Brandon and I have been talking about how do we create more going on to town? um without you know building fancy parks that we don't have funds for. And the idea came to me to host a movie in the night uh movie in the park night. Um it would be free to the community. The goal is the reason we're bringing it to you guys is um it would be for next fiscal year technically because we're looking late July um to like know where to put it in the budget or how to worst case scenario we're looking at thousand but that said um the PTA is looking to make sure that their movie license covers and they think it does but I want worst case scenario um sound system all that I've found resources for that. So, most likely that $1,000 is not going to get hit. Um, in doing it, it would be a community event. Um, not doing it as a fundraiser, but since we're doing it, we would add a component to raise money for Veterans Park. Um, the thought is to do kind of as a America's 250th celebration so that it's a trial run on an activity without people thinking that we're going to do this every summer. Um, and to show the movie Cars, um, a ne a resident in town has already committed that they would be more than happy to bring they have a life-size um, Lightning McQueen. That's why we're we're looking at, you know, what kind of Americana movie. So anyway, we just wanted some feelers from

you guys that when the budget gets laid in front of us that we wanted to if there was no appetite to not put that energy in. I'm confused on two points. One, the idea of a Pixar movie being Americana that was originally. Uh secondly, you said free to the community, but then you're talking about the budget because it's not going to be free to if to the city, the people. If we pay the taxes, is it really in the taxes? Yeah. Okay. There will not be an admissions charge to go.

Um the goal is to find enough community partners that hopefully that the bill would be free. Um, for instance, I found somebody who has a um commercial sound system, screen, projector, and so now it's just also trying to figure out if we have to pay the movie license or if the PTA can sign off on that. I would love to see this done. I would not love to see this city spend money.

That's where I think movies in the park are great. There's tons of cities that very well. I just don't think we should be spending money from the collective tax base to pay for it if not the entire tax base. It seems just a little outside of what we um I think it's a great way to show that even though we have a park that's basically a field that it is usable space for community events. Absolutely. And I think we should show that. I don't think we should pay to show that. So when will you have the answers on the cost if there's enough support where there's no cost?

I would know. We would know before before May or you know May well the PTA is going to look to let me know. Um I told her let me wait and see if there's any feedback before she goes digging. Um, if not the movie license was like $600. We which is actually And how much that license was is for that one movie because it's in $600. 600. Why do you think movie theaters charge so much? If we charged admission, we would have to pay 50% of our admission. Isn't it just cheaper to go on Amazon or buy us?

You can't use it for commercial purposes. That's not your area of law. I understand. you can. So, okay. But yeah, I think there's plenty of ways that funds can be raised for this, whether it's, you know, charging food card fees for people to be there to sell popcorn or whatever. But I don't think this is appropriate for a city budget item. But I hope this sounds great. I hope I'll definitely go with my kids for sure 100%. Yeah. I'm for it cost a thousand. I think that that's fine. I think we should try to see if there's any kind of fundraising we can do to offset that cost. At least we have a ceiling.

Well, part of the fundraising that we're doing like the I'm happy to put in the leg work to try to, like I said, I got three of the four things donated. It would be really nice if the school's license would cover cover that 600. That would be well yeah that's ideal consider something that's in the public domain well and it's always great to say hey it'd be great to see if we can fundra this I'm going to be honest with you guys that requires people to put the energy in to fundraat have anything I see two ladies over there really interested we would help with team with it

yeah we're good which also you know being able to do stuff under nonprofit That could help too because that was the amount that was quoted to me as a city, not as Yeah. Yes. Is the $600 a one time thing? Yeah. For one movie show or is it just for that? It's the two different movies I asked about it was the same price, but it's I don't think it's unlimited use. No, it's that one. Yeah, it's because like for 200 people outdoors, an outdoor one is a lot more than indoor because an indoor they know 100% you're at max capacity when you tell them your building size. Look, because here's the way I think about it, right? 600 bucks. What do they still do like cheap Tuesday movies for seven bucks or whatever? Five bucks.

Five bucks. Okay. So, we don't have a 100 people show up for this. We would have been better off buying a 100 tickets for people to go to the movie theater Tuesday, right? So, I just I don't I don't think it's a citywide item, but I hope it happens. I hope we get the community involved to get the money, but that's I don't think we should dictate people use their tax money to pay for. Yes, Leah, did you um what park are you thinking about? Commons. Commons Park. So, we did years ago we had a movie in the park.

Um I can't remember what year, but it was pretty long ago. And I think we had six kids show up. So I mean we weren't involved with the school at all. We're hosting it were involved with the school. But I think if you had parents who were It would have to be advertised. Well, yeah. And I know that the school one when they do one that is their largest attended event and they filled the gym like to the rim. So which is why they have a movie license. They have an unlimited one because they use it as much as possible because it is such a popular event. And you're saying there's a chance that we could use that.

Yeah. Yeah. Their um PTA presence approached me when we were just chitchatting about cuz I was asking I was asking her, "Hey, is the turnout still pretty high?" And she said, "Yeah." And I told her why. And she goes, "I think our movie license would cover it." But she has to, you know, dig. Worst case scenario, we might have to move it and find out if we could use the school if it's blinked that it has to be at the school. Yeah. But um yeah, so the school equals it too. I guess it would. The question though is will the school approve it during the summer? Right.

My hope is the school district is pretty supportive of the city using the you know the facilities. Um just happens to be that the zone runs out of the portables. So there is a a bathroom available without tapping into the full b the full facilities that they shut down during the summer. So I mean there's that possibility. I just thought the park itself would be cool to you know do on our turf. But if needed it or something but if you know if it saves $600 to do it at the school I would also work that direction. So okay I will great idea though. Love I will work as hard as I can in the next month to just come back and tell you if it's a yay or a nay if I'm able to.

I'm sorry. Did you give us a freshman like targeted date? No, we're thinking July 18th because the 25th is Newberg's Old Fashion Festival. Um the month the week before is garage sales and then we've talked about a backup date of August 1st when I was talking because if you have someone in town with the car that's pretty cool

but and he also has other connections to like meet her and stuff but and I'm also open to doing a different vehicle but uh or movie but and the way my brain went before Americana is it's old school small town Route 66 But and I thought also the kids could decorate cardboard boxes and bring them as cars and we could do a mom kid car show and stuff, but not the shel bullet. Anyway, I don't want to take, you know, an hour. So, okay. Um I I think that there's mixed feelings on spending money, but I also think that I can talk with Elcat to see how we might be able to

support them. Yeah. Everybody loves the idea.

I know. Yeah. So, and like I said, you know, I I agree, you know, spending money is hard when I shared that ticket price to Brandon. We chewed on it. Um, and that's why I already started like touching bases and trying to find how to make it not, you know, I don't want to have to run the sound system for it. So, I found someone. So, okay, I will just give you guys an update next month whether it's a, hey, it looks like it's moving forward and I found solutions or may and give that last chance to go forward or not. Okay. So, on to action items. 8A, a resolution authorizing the execution of the legal services agreement related to the AFF product liability litigation. Brianna,

thank you, Madam Mayor. So last month I had mentioned there we were discussing with LOC and David um and the LLOC um the LLOC um the League of Oregon Cities attorneys who are working on this class action lawsuit for the first phase. Um right now they're starting the the class action lawsuit signups for phase two. um preliminary numbers that Greg and I heard in our initial meeting, similar size um uh similar size system with minimal with minimal issues of PFAS. They were getting an upwards of 70 something,000 a year for the first couple years and then quote mailbox money for the the preceding years after that. Um I I do like this to kind of help pay off some of the Mac water and light debt if possible. Um but obviously the thing first and foremost is um wanting to uh sign the agreement. This agreement would allow the three firms to represent us on behalf of um the city for the class action lawsuit and all it would take right now is operational testing uh at the water source and then um we would send them everything over to their um their attorney's um tester. We did have some questions about um attorney client privilege in that data and then also if this data would lead to bigger enforcement as a whole. Um but we did confirm David, myself and Greg that um any data shared is going to be at attorney client privilege. And there was also a concern about this being us being an Oregon municipality. There was a the initial draft had a five-year retention schedule but we notated that it needed to be a 10-year retention schedule. And so David wanted to make sure that was on there. Um, so everything before you has been vetted by David and myself and Greg operationally and administratively. I know we have two lawyers on the council that may ask questions. So I'm here and hopefully I can answer them for you.

Okay. So any questions? I'm not a lawyer but a question. Okay. Uh section seven, page 15 under termination and rep or repres unrepresentation, excuse me. Uh down twothirds the way down if the attorneys are discharged or are disqualified. I understand discharged. Uh how could the attorneys be disqualified? And who would do the disqualification? It would be a conflict of interest comes up. Okay. Okay. And then they are paid for their time, reasonable fees. Who pays those fees? The class action

law class. So, so whatever whatever they recover for, it's a contingency. It's I think it's 33% of this. It's a contingency. Let's say they recover $100,000. Yeah, I got that. So, if they're disqualified or discharged, it's they're they put in work still, they get to keep a portion of the attorney fees proportional to the amount of attorney work they did. So they didn't win half of the work, they didn't win half of the they split that essentially with the new firm that would take over. Okay. So it just looked like to me if they're if they're fired or they do something improper, it's in there so that people don't get like the day before they're going to get their settlement check, they're going to fire the attorney so they keep it. It's very very stable.

Or the other way I was kind of lean in was uh if it doesn't look like the lawsuit's going well, I'm I'm going to get fired or I'm going to get discharged. So then I will have Okay. Okay. I think that that was it for any other questions or anyone can bring up why we're looking into this at all.

No, no. So, um, the League of Oregon Cities sends out like emergency emails and this says, "Hey, phase two of the PFA class action lawsuit. We I phase one before I was employed. So, this is the second phase." So, League of Oregon City says, "Hey, if you're a water system and you may have and you have and you can test for PFAS or have small traces, you may be eligible for money." I see. So, that's when I reached out to the legal work and cities attorney who gave us this attorney. this attorney met with myself, David, and and Greg um twice, and then Greg and I met with him another time. So, was there any concerns that you wanted to bring to council that were addressing that to just to convey?

I mean, I to maybe put you all at some ease. Um, this is public record. Um, EPA did require every city in Oregon to test for the PFAS. Yeah. Um, ours came back at a non-detectable level. Oops. The last email I got from EPA was we've no longer further needed to uh test for the PFAS because our levels are so low. Yes. So there's PFAS in in everyone's water. It's just a matter of how much do you have? Yes, we have very low levels of PFA. So I have no concern with this. Okay.

So Brandon for a resol a resolution. Do I read the resolution, then we vote on it, or do we vote on it and I read the It's been a while since I've done a resolution. Um, you would go ahead and you would read the the title. Yeah. Just because I won't forgive myself if I don't say this. I know David's a lawyer. He knows. I'm sure the two of you know, but because it says you'll be copied on all matters. During client privilege belongs to the client, correct? It's protected until either one of you talk to anybody else and that's what have to still keep it tight. Yeah. That's three. I don't Well, that's three and David. Yes.

And during this if needed, I don't see it needed in this topic, but is this something more like an executive session and then we get that kind client? Um, no. I mean, I would keep you updated. Honestly, it's from what everything we I understand. Correct me if I'm wrong. I mean, the minute we approve this, Greg's going to go get a test like by the end of the month. They're going to start doing it. I think we can probably see a check by the end of the year, if not early. 2027 like it's it's all they want from us is testing. Mhm. So obviously we will update you on anything. Obviously if I need to send an email that's you know privileged or if we need to have something in terms of settlement

or something happen action blows up or something then I would bring that to you in executive session. But I think that's what I was asking that if needed that in any topic with this like we can be looped into the client privilege. Yeah. Yeah. But I I I heard the three of you guys. I was like, "How does it count?" Okay. I was just making sure. Okay. Does anyone have objection to me reading it by title only? Nope. Nope. Okay. Any conflict of interest? Do I have to ask all that conflict of interest?

Okay. um a resolution authorizing the execution of the legal services agreement related to the AFF product liability litigation resolution number 2026-03 I am looking for a motion of your packet if you wants to make a motion oh wait wait did I miss I need a motion to accept it and then I need the resolution. Oh, okay. Second.

Okay. I have on the table a motion to accept it. Can Can you call roll vote? Counc. Boros. Hi. Councelor Carwell. Hi. Councelor D. Hi. Hi. Councelor Matthew. Hi. Okay. So that was accepting that yes, we want to do the lawsuit. Now the resolution. Okay. Any objections of title only? Nope. A resolution authorizing the execution of the legal services agreement related to the AFF product liability litigation.

Do I have a motion? Page 10. I move to approve the contract for legal services for AFF PFAS litigation with stag Louisa Louisa LLC Thor Certie Hulit Ernest and Wilkins BC and Inova Legal Advisors BC and authorize the city administrator to execute the agreement on behalf of the city of Lafayette. I'll second.

Okay. I have a motion to approve the contract for legal services for AFF PAS litigation with Stag Lea LLC Party Jew and Wilkinson PC and Inovia Legal Advisors PC and authorize the city administrator to execute the agreement on behalf of the city of Lafayette. Any further discussion? Okay. Kennedy, can you call roll vote? Hi. Mr. Burrough. Hi. Councelor Garwell. Hi. Professor Kit. I councelor Mackie. Hi. And councelor Gilman was absent. Okay. Motion passes. One quick. Yeah.

Um on the uh the page to sign the dates are on the team. Okay. Yeah.

Okay. That'll be Yeah, that was last month. Okay. Moving on. Number nine, midyear fiscal year 2526 budget update presentation. Brandon.

Awesome. Thank you, Madam Mayor. So, in my usual uh my usual um financial transparency update just so council's aware of how we're doing um ahead of the budget season um and throughout the year. Just want to kind of go over some uh some numbers. I'll I'll normally just kind of go through it by fund. If you have any questions or anything, I'll highlight anything that stands out, but if you have any questions, you can stop me. So, uh, we're starting with our general fund revenues. Um, everything's looking pretty good so far. Our, um, beginning fund balance, uh, was a little lower than we had projected in the budget year. Um, but our property taxes, what we what we have budgeted for, we we tend to budget pretty conservatively on like the property taxes and like SDC's just so we're not um just so we we have the room there because we, you know, especially when it comes to the housing market and with the property taxes, we can never know, especially when we're going to get them. So, um, we always make sure we uh try to do those as conservatively as possible. We have a 6% growth in that just year to date on property taxes. So that's great. Um all of the revenues are pretty straightforward. Um we have about 15% of our yearly budgets, our yearly revenues to still come in. It's halfway through the year. So that'll we'll exceed that. On the expenditure side, on the admin side, general fund, everything's lining up pretty well. Um we did do a bunch of material and services. um orders in the first half of the year. So, we're charting a little less than 50%. We're at 41% left. We'll gladly make up for that throughout the year. So, I wouldn't be too worried about that. Um so, outside of that, we're looking pretty good on the general fund side. Planning, uh same thing. We're we're still

meeting. We're exceeding, you know, the 50%. We're at 63% remaining. So, we'll obviously see carryover from that on the planning side. And as you do know, moving forward, um, since Amanda is as a full-time staffer and has a planning background and a degree, we'll be using her a lot more for our planning. Um, this the the smaller planning functions, obviously, the big things Jim will still have to do or our city planner will still have to do. Um, so you'll be able to see some of those numbers actually lower over the next couple years as we phase in more work for Amanda and less for the contractor. On the building side, same thing. We're exceeding um well, we're under the uh the under expectations by about 10% mid through midway year on that. Um courts, same thing. Um we've only spent about 35 37% of the budget so far. We still got 63% so we won't exceed anything on there. Um the police services contract that's always going to be right on the right on the line. Uh so um we have about 50% there. Parks um looking pretty good. We're under spending on parks right now. We we have about 65%. uh on that um fire. So on so some of the salary. So some of the salaries we still have yet to recoup from last year's wildfire season. So what we're going to do is we're going to move some of my uh salary because some of my salary comes out of fire. We're going to put that in another department so we're able to not have to worry about going over on fire this year or do budget amendment. Do you think it won't come in before the end of the fiscal year? No.

With the way the OSM grants like we get grants, we get the revenues back all sporadically throughout the year. Is this taking longer than it did last year? No. No. It's just I think because the amount of people we had out last year, some of the money is coming through flow and I think we went through three or four wildfires last year instead. I think the previous year we had two or three. So it just depends on state accounting. So yeah, it's always we always get those recouped like the next fiscal year and just the way how that works and then you know the state had that they'll get more money from last year's wildfires. This is from summer of 2025. Yes. So it's last year 20. Yes. You would think the government would work faster than that. Not everybody work not everybody works the city of fans. Remember that.

Which government you talk? So yeah, but other than that, um outside of that, uh the salary personnel issue, the total fire department was still trending lower, which we had some concerns after the first quarter of the year. Um we were kind of spending more than we had. We were I was liking, but we're good. We're good to go now. And I think we'll be able to actually stay um under a few we'll actually have a few extra percent compared to last year. Uh so total general general fund expenditures, we got about 52% remaining. So that's right on to where we need to be um for the year. Uh when it comes to enterprise funds, our super fund revenues, uh our beginning fund balance was 16% higher. All these numbers came in the first quarter we had unodudited. So the second quarter we actually had our audited numbers come. So you'll see some of the movement on the um what we budget for the beginning fund balance and what the actual was which would be under year to date. Um because we don't finalize that until we actually get the finalized uh audit through. Uh so we're looking good on that on the uh the revenues. Obviously half of our sewer revenue kit has come in because it's the half of the year that comes throughout every single month through the year. Um on the grants, so the grant will be carried over to the next fiscal year. So we'll probably have to carry that over until the money is dispersed. Um but we always want to account for it just to have it. Um sewer fund expenditures, we're looking pretty good on that. Um you sell 87%. We haven't spent a lot. Well, there's still the contingency in there. Um, and then the capital outlay obviously with the grant we were hoping to have it this fiscal year because of the last legislative session that didn't go through. So the capital outlay is 2.2 million. Obviously that's not going to get done this year because the we'll be be forwarding that over to next year's budget. Water fund revenues. Uh you see last year the we had a 19% increase in our beginning fund balance in the water funds. Um that's shredding pretty good. uh the water fund revenues uh we'll we'll still see the increase throughout

the rest of the year on that. Um the big the big water chunks for um the summer months have already been accounted for. So that's why you see that uh that 22% still there. Um expenditures. We're doing really good on our water. We're right at about 52% left of the year. So we're working good on that. um shouldn't see any major projects on that side. Same thing with the streets street well street revenues we have there on the expenditure side we'll obviously be starting some of that hopefully Madison work this fiscal year after talking to Gordon will probably need um some uh month or two in the next fiscal year to finish off that project which Craig will touch base on here in in the the monthly reports. um sewer SDC's we saw growth in our beginning balance about 20% um from what we had projected versus the actual year to date. Um we actually brought in already more um uh SDC revenue than we already had projected at least in the other funds. Those are going to be little um little uh reimbursements and whatnot. So that's always good. Um on the expenditure side, nothing really. We haven't really spent any SEC money on the sewer and we're obviously waiting on that for um next year. Actually, I need to actually notate with Jamie on that because uh the the grand match came from the sewer SDC, not the sewer club. So, I actually need to notate that so we can transfer that fund over. Um, so yeah, street sec water SDC expenditures there pretty flatline. There's nothing we haven't spent anything there. Park SDC, same. Uh, we actually exceeded what we we had planned for revenues this year by 12%.

Um, so that's good. Obviously, we got SDC growth in there. Our beginning fund balance was 20 26% more than we had projected last year. Um, and then nothing on the expenditure side on the park sec. And we're still working through our capital improvement programs. Um, yeah, pretty straightforward. I do these three or four times a year. So, is there any questions? Any anything on that? It's not a question on it. Just a comment. This is way too small. Like the side you have would have been great, but this capital improvement, it's a blur. Okay. And you're like, "Everything's going great." And I'm like, "Oh, what what's the red line?"

That's why that's why you had them here to follow through. Yeah. Okay. It worked for me. Well, you're 29, so

sorry. Just especially if it was like pre-sent out and it was for the packet. We're going to have zoomed in at home. Totally different. Appreciate it. Okay, back soon. Yeah. Um but other than that, um just a reminder, we have our budget meetings coming up soon. Um so be ready. Um you all have those in the schedule um for April and May. May 40th. Okay. Um with that, we are on to department reports. So no rest for the weary. Back to you, Brandon.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. So, we had this work session scheduled um last month. We had a preliminary draft provided by the city planner um which we all had to kind of take a look at and decipher a little bit more um line by line. Um I did talk to the city uh the city planner about the expectations about getting this. Sorry, sorry, it wasn't staff reports, it's work session. Yeah, I said okay, sorry.

Um so, I did talk to the city planner about making sure that the full-time city staff has a little bit longer time to vet it. Um, we did ask going forward that if we have major amendments like that, we have two weeks notice. So, at least myself and Amanda can kind of work through those and and see if any edits need to be done instead of bringing in the day of the the packet publishing. So, what Amanda had done um after the last meeting was kind of take some um take some ideas that were kind of discussed through council, discussed from some of the business owners, members of the planning commission, and kind of put them in the packet. So the first one in front of you is going to be what was presented last month which says the original on it and the items of discussion are highlighted in yellow. The next document is going to say draft and that one the items on there are going to be um

in blue in bold blue so we can take a look at what was discussed and what the changes were on the the proceeding document. I thought the changes were great. Yeah. Yes. I felt like it was falling mistake though, you know, trying to come up with my own language at first and then I realized Well, thank you for that. We'll just need to read ahead. Makes sense. You have the idea if we break it down. I even have my little sticky.

So, you know, um I know there were some comments from the planning commission. I know there's been talk about parking spots and what those look like. Um, we want to make sure that I obviously this is going to be a document. This I mean we're probably going to do if you all approve moving forward with the next draft version of the ordinance. Obviously things that may happen in 18 to 24 months that we didn't that we didn't predict in this. But I think based on all of the feedback on the noise ordinance, the the parking, I think we have a pretty good foundation here. I think the big thing is parking. Do we want to require the parking? Do we want to let them just park off street? Um, and I know that's kind of I know um uh the res resident Ron Kerr not functioning as a planning commissioner and I spoke yesterday with Amanda and we were just kind of talking about parking regulations and how they may hurt more than help. So, I think that's something we really need to think about on, you know, the land use in terms of on-site on-site parking for the brick and mortar. But if they want to bring somebody over, are we are you okay with how the parking is set up or do you want to maybe discuss how

far there's not parking? You mean in reference to the two spot? I like the change. It could be where there's no requirements at all for MFUS, but I know that can, you know, that's obviously going to mean bleeding over into the the street parking, but I know I go places and I have to walk five, six, seven, eight blocks to go to a food cart. We're very dense downtown. I don't I just want to make sure that we're we're we're aware of the situation in Lafayette. Where did the minimum criteria for two spots come from in the first place? Planning Commission and City Council. So it's I like

in terms of the parking standards that the actual two per that came from the planning that kind of came from the planning commission originally. I say I was I was talking about actual the parking spaces on the land use side of things. Okay my mistake. Sorry. I think with parking I from my understanding from last month that that two requiring additional parking is going to just a minute um the person or business um on the propert what that would allow it on the

yeah I like that there's in here that it can't take away from their minimum parking one thing I might suggest is stated that they are able to access and use the available parking. So like I mean he's a boss because they came to us. If they you know we can't add two parking spots we don't we're already at minimum but if they then told the corn guy but you're not your customers can't park in our parking lot then I'd have an issue but I don't see me requiring them to have more parking. Does that make sense? Not really. What if while the corn guy was open, we had two designated parking spots

temporary signs that that's going to huge. I think it can't be designated because that would take away from the minimum that Boston line is so long. I mean, it's already Bostonas is already at the minimum. This parking lot that if it was designated two spots, then that would take away from only while the corn guy's there. But it still would be while the corn gets there. Does it make more sense to remove the requirement for the parking spaces and then if it becomes an issue we address it?

Do you think we should keep the requirement for because part of it is that when the planning commission was looking at it they were picturing like kind of vacant lots. So making sure that there is pavement for parking I think and that there's parking available. gravel wouldn't be okay. So required. No, it's required. Thanks, by the way. I appreciate having you here. That's wonderful. Um, but my understanding as drafted is it's fine as long as the food car is not literally sitting in a parking spot, then they're good with their minimum number of parking spots. Correct. Yeah.

So, basically, we're saying as long as the business is already operating legally conforming with parking, they can have food guard. Yeah. So, I don't think we even need to remove it. I think it's fine as it's written, right? Yeah. I think the question was, but for a business that doesn't already have a use, like let's say there's an let's say the lot on the other side of the gas station got torn down and was an empty lot and someone said, "I'm going to put a food cart here." But there's not been nothing designated. I think that's covered in here, too. I think that's this looks fine. Okay, I'm going to circle real quick. Um, Ron Kerr the resident, not planning commissioner. Is that what I hear?

Roner the resident, not the planning commissioner. Although I will segue to planning commissioner. Yes, the two parking spaces did originate from the planning commission. It was based on the vision that we would potentially be starting with a bare lot and trying to establish some form of baseline.

Gotcha. Going back to my personal hat and looking at the discussion that everybody has made, looking at the discussion from last month with regard to business. The reason I come to the conclusion that for both G and F of basically removing parking requirements and when I say removing parking requirements, removing parking spaces is the unintended consequences of requiring two spaces or even requiring one space is you can take an existing business that is operating potentially at capacity or that is potentially grandfathered in, whether it be today or somewhere down the road, but could be grandfathered in. And now they're at capacity. And now we sit down and say, "Oh, great. We'd like to have this food cart come along, but we're sorry. We're full up on business." And I I think that is a disservice to Lafayette. Uh, I think if you have a food cart there, if you've got and I'll just make numbers up. If you got a parking lot with 30 spaces in it and for the businesses that are already there, that's represents minimum requirement. If a food cart comes along, somebody makes an application says, "Hey, I want to put a food card here." Yes, that's going to take up one spot. Boom. Now you're down to 29. Whoops. We can't do that. I think that is a disservice both to existing business to Lafayette and I think they can all cooperate and work together. I don't want to here's my concern with that. So for one, we have minimum space requirements for businesses for a purpose, right? Those laws were put in place for a reason. So taking away from it and adding customer flow goes against the whole premise of

those laws being in place. My second piece of this is the hypothetical you give is a non-issue right now. There's not a single place with 30 spots. Just given the given the hand we're dealt right now and the playing field we're on. I just I I don't think it's an issue at this point. Now, if we add, you know, 100 acres of mixed use where there's more commercial and retail developments in there, we may have to revisit it. But I think as Lafayette sits now, I I just I don't see it as an issue.

And the other thing, and of course, counterpoint is yes, there are certain parking standards that are minimum, but keep in mind that here a couple years ago, most cities, most municipalities, most states are moving in the direction of literally scrapping minimum parking requirements. We're not one of them though.

Correct. But I'm I guess what I'm saying is give it consideration. Give the flexibility to sit down and say, "Hey, yes, at this point it may be a minimum standard if you want to call it that. Give the flexib have the flexibility in your pocket." So you can say, "Okay, it is this, but it can function just fine with a little less. I think that that just gets us into too many of case by case spaces because so many so many businesses not yet have different size buttons, right? Like there are nights here at the council meeting when everybody wants to be friendly and come say hi. Thank you all for being here, but they also

but they also want tacos, right? Like this parking lot alone has issues already, right? But I think that if you just start to apply it that way, you're going to end up on such a case-byase basis for each business and they're given parking spots that it starts to look like the city's just using its discretion and picking favorites. And that's not a vote we want to be should not pick favorites, but we should

we should have discretion. But I'm saying if you get to a discretionary point where every single business in Lafayette is different with a different number of parking spots and they're all going to ask for these things, it starts to look like it's it's perception and action are different. But the perceived idea of the city playing favorites with some businesses over others, it's a problem. It's a perception problem. Well, and my my concern is alongside with um councelor Gilgan is the one parking lot I'm thinking of because it was what inspired some of these changes. It's a shared lot between two businesses. So all of a sudden if we say okay you can take up one of your parking spots for your food truck then that's going to impact that neighboring business too.

Then the business and you have to have the owner of the and that's fine. But what if the and they have to have they have to work out a they have to work in cooperation. Okay, that doesn't mean they can. But yeah, I'm just saying that that that better put it on the table and let them work in cooperation than just totally take it off the playing field entire personal opinion. Okay, thank you. I appreciate that insight. Outside of a boss though, why can't I come up with a place that would even accommodate Um, Dollar General, good. Yeah, the bar, whatever. Exactly. Besties pub would be able to city center market,

the church, city center market. Yeah. Really? I mean, that's why it was to me very important that the one person who does have a food truck and it was impacting it was technically 100% of the businesses using it. Maybe center of we as a city could put Yeah. X team. Yeah. We could we at the city could decide to build a community center with food trucks if we took away the minimum requirement. Why do I feel like when you drive back for like the harvest festival?

No. Long term like different like if we wanted to rent out, you know. And I get that even Georgia for the harvest festival or bring it in.

Well, that's just stupid. No, it's part of the event permit. And I wanted to point out that I think the way that it's written Yeah.

Hey, wait. I would like to listen to Amanda. I think the way that it's written basically can't result in the reduction of like the minimum parking, but I would argue that because they're mobile, like this would prohibit you from putting like um seating in a parking space or putting like storage for it, but because they're mobile, I mean, cars are reducing the minimum parking required by parking that they don't have to shop at a boss to park there. Like it's it's all open anyway. Um, and so I I thought that this would give us some mechanism without being

So are you saying that like I own a although we have enough taco businesses in here, a taco truck? A literal ice cream truck. Taco truck. I drive it in because it's a drivable movable that it legally could park there and sell out of it and it doesn't impact their minimum parking because it's parking.

It doesn't it's not permanent was my thought. like it's not something that can't be moved. If it was a problem, it would be easy to say that's an issue. And you know, it would give us a way to um if there was a problem, say, "Hey, this is this is the the problem, but not um get into the weeds with applications and things like that." I think this looks good. Yeah, I think yeah, I I don't like the idea of letting it remove minimum parking. So, I don't think that change needs to happen. I like these changes. Any other

the other thing I wanted to ask was removal. So, so if we we have parking um kind of settled. A lot of the other things I did was just trying to combine things to make it shorter. Um,

but so with the covered dining areas, um, I tried to kind of flush that out a little bit more, but I wasn't sure if we wanted like temporary or removable, um, would be a better word for the covered area. Um, I also phrased it with a fist diners. Um, because I was thinking like if you say you could have three tables, they could be really big tables or they could, you know, like we might have been picturing little cafe table sets or something, but you could the way it was written before put table, right? Like people who could Yeah,

it's I appreciate you making that. I would prefer the word temporary or removable. I mean with enough effort that removable, right? I won't be putting that effort, but like so I I would prefer temporary. I think it better captures the spirit of of the of the intent. Okay. I like I like that word too. Um did we talk about last month requiring the same room putting chairs and stuff away at night like we do for right away? I can't remember what we the consensus was on that. Whatever we require for the

Oh, yeah. Whatever we require for the those who have their outdoor seating. Outdoor seating. It was put away. They have to take them out, right? To avoid theft and anything like that. Yes. But then also for instance because I I spoke to city center market they said okay well I'm open 24 hours a day I can have them 24/7 I'm all like I think we had decided the difference was right away is the right away

where it's private property. So, can they have a table out if they don't have a food truck? Then who are we like it's their property to if they want to deal with vagrancy they their property? I think that's what I I honestly don't remember what we decided what our consensus was. I just I thought it was if it's like on the sidewalk in a certain way, but if it's not a sidewalk unless it's

correct approved by us. So, if they're on if they're at Dollar General um and that back area that's adjacent to the um the Pioneer that they would uh they wanted to just chain them up to the chain them up at the end of the night, come back the next day parking, you know, and then obviously from a standpoint we from a code force standpoint make sure it doesn't come like outside storage, not like hey we're going to leave our refrigerator and our freezer there. We've had those issues on other other commercial properties where it becomes is this a nuisance or is this actual part of so the enforcement would be like if it was the main building

whatever their issue is it's their private property so they want to leave a table out okay not have to be that guy but we're talking about allowing folks to leave benches tables chair overnight and the idea is it's their property y if the idea is it's their property people wouldn't need permits for sheds bigger than 10 by 10 ft. Okay. So, in the way just bankruptcy was mentioned, right, I think the city has an interest in preventing that. I think it actually makes sense to have these things put up overnight. I disagree. Like I mean, you can go to different like taco carts and they have one or two nice benches out

that are left out overnight. It's not in the rideway. It's not It's part of their food truck. They just open. Where are they supposed to put it? So I I agree with what you're saying like it's it's nice benches, right? Why why would we have an issue with that? The issue becomes cities have an interest in deterring certain uh I don't know how to say this demographic. I won't apologize certainities. Everybody said it for you. Um loitering. Um so you know leave it like I think it's a great idea. Dundee is doing it. They're doing great. It looks nice.

Look, I I own part of an office building in short. We looked at on the side of it putting in a nice bar test area and a little nice bench, right? Uh one of the inspectors who was looking at some plumbing stuff unrelated, he said, "I wouldn't do that if I were you. You'll end up with somebody sleeping there every night." So, there's a deterrent effect to putting stuff away. Well, like the places in Dundee, a lot of them have the solid tents that get locked and they're walled in. Yeah. And that's that's different, I think, if they're walled in. Why is that different? My opinion is I don't think benches should be left out overnight. Not in the rightway. You're talking on their property. Yep. So, just like my property at home, I could put my bench away at night.

Oh, well, that's different. It's a different zone. It's a different ordinance. That's very different, right? But the city does tell you what you can and can't put on your property at certain times, right? There's a reason that property is in a pavement. There's reasons people have to put in for permits to build certain size sheds. These are all reasonable city interests that we have in certain properties. Is is the neighbor next door with their covered patio area, do we require them to put their tables away at night? It's not commercial. No, I'm talking to Martha's. I I don't know. Is that in the zoning right now? Uh they they can leave them out under their patio, right? In fact, the bench though patio is also not a parking lot. Yeah.

Well, I don't see these benches in the parking lot. I'm thinking if they had a side little patio patio like it's all zoning, right? It's all language and ordinances. It's all different. I don't think there's anything in in the commercial building. Yeah. I just I don't I don't I don't think we should make it a more strict rule if if it's not in in their parking lot. So like I I'm not using mores cuz they're poor against something. It's just right there as an example. We don't require them to put their tables and chairs away under their patio. But if they had it in their parking lot in like a parking spot.

Yeah. Because they're not their food truck is very different. Like so it's different. And look, the fact of the matter is this is all hypothetical at this point based on the food truck activities we currently have in this town. It's not an issue. I just don't want it to become an issue down the road. Yeah. I think one thing you're we're also uh missing or what we're looking is we were talking parking just a few minutes ago and now how crowded it is and designating something and now you we're thinking about how asking them to put something away every night into something. Will their picnic tables fit inside your food trucks? Is that even folding ones? Is that even

food trucks are mobile, right? They go to different areas, right? Table is not and I think that's the line I'm trying to draw with a food truck and what's a permanent business sitting in a parking so if they want to put their tables away, they need to bring a trailer and put it in a parking spot, slide their tables and chairs in and then they're taking another park. Right. No, I agree with that. That's a great point. And I'm not necessarily suggesting that it needs to be an every night situation, but if it's, you know, if they're going to be there for the weekend, maybe there's a there's a a three-day, five day period if they're going to be there. I don't know many food trucks other than food or pods, right? I don't know many food trucks that hang out in the same spot for three straight months, right? Usually they're there for a few days at a time. And so maybe it's something that curtails to that.

And I think we already have a rule about they can't just park it there and not you like it not be open for business. So then if it's not open, If it were, do we really want to get to a point where, you know, the food truck just becomes a secondary business in that law? I don't know. And I don't know if there's a right or wrong answer to that, but good food. Yeah, that's that's an angle. Um, so I just, you know, things that I just don't I want to make sure, right? And I don't know that there's right or wrong answers to any of this. I just think it's things that should be considered. I just think that that we should make it um I don't want to say easy, but make it a reasonable what what we're asking them to do.

Here's my thought. We don't have this issue. This is a great starting point. Let's start here. We can always revise it. Well, and if if a vagrancy issue happened where, hey, XYZ law is allowing and they don't care that people are sleeping in their eating area. Wouldn't that then be like, "Hey, that means you're using it outside of business hours. You're allowing people to can we go that route and say, "Hey, you need to I just think it's really hard to sit here and play off these hypotheticals.

Yeah, let's do this." And then if it becomes an issue, we need to address. And then to throw something else in there, I was not thinking about the packing up of all of the um tables, but I did have a note to ask about the hoverings because we said that they just have to be coverings that can be like anchored. So, I'm imagining a fair number would be pop-up tents. Um would those need to come down at night? Like even if we let the tables stay, would do we want the awnings overnight? I was thinking about wind, not vagrancy. I was going to say I think it's the weather on that, right? Yeah. Or I was thinking like if nobody's there.

Well, and I think there's a difference between like um like the corn guys pop up compared to a 10 by 10 shades, you know, the red those market what they have. That's like that's like if it's really secure like that's very different. So I think right, you know, here's the thing. These people spend money on these pop-ups. If the weather's so bad that they're going to blow out in the street, they're probably not leaving them out. They're gonna lose it. Y beable. And it does say it has to be able to be securely tied down. So that kind of covers us away. And so change the subject. Yeah. Go ahead.

All right. Um trash can is required. We also ask them to empty it. empty it every uh at closing or something along those lines or I think that falls under the whole code enforcement. Yeah. Trash and debris in the commercial area. We can get them on that. Okay. Just long as it's kind of so they know there's a paper that we have the the trash person. Yeah. Well, when when when the city staff drafts up like a permit, we'd make sure on like some of the language, you know, trash, you know, trash needs to be maintained. Cite the site the commercial downtown code. site some of the trash stuff. We'll make sure we have all that so we get there. John Hancock.

And it already says, you know, keeping the premises free of refuge and litter. So if they're not empty, every now and then there's a dog wandering around town every now and then. Or teenager or a teenager or raccoon having a taco. That's right. That's right. It did you get answers you needed from us or was that just all us? Are we all consensus that the changes in blue are acceptable are acceptable and we're good to send it temporary? Yes. Okay. And so then what would happen is um since um we had a stay on the public hearing, we would have to reopen the public hearing.

And then I'll talk to you about the logistics of that. Okay. meeting. So the next meeting. So it's going to be a it's going to be busy next couple months. Okay. Talk to you. No, you don't. You about it. Okay. Good. Now we will move on to department random. All right. Go back. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Or you just hang out here. You're good. You can just hang on over here. All right. So, um I'll I'll do some things and then I'll ask some questions. that I have to give some time over to uh Greg. Um I know I was supposed to have it this month, but between the grant and some of this other stuff, I got really behind. I couldn't get the um the final strategic plan laid out. I'm working on it. It'll get there. Promise. Um, so I in our talks with Recology over the next franchisee agreement, one thing we want to try to test this year before we sign that. One big issue we're seeing is curbside pickup around uh, cleanup day. A lot of disabled, a lot of seniors, a lot of people just cannot get here. So, Recology and I are going to look at picking up 20 people this year just just to see how this goes. Um, obviously Robert's going to work with them and obviously city staff if they're disabled, they don't have a vehicle. We see a lot of people with outside storage, mattresses, old washers, and they they just can't get them somewhere. Um, and we've tried to reach out for help and we get minimal help. You know, sometimes like I know Robert got somebody Oh, and we got help from the uh

humanity of humanity. So, um we were talking to ecology about a long-term strategy. I think I think what I'm thinking of is going to be way too costly for the city, but they said, "Let's see if we if there's at least an appetite for some type of small scale pickup." So, this year we're just going to we're going to have them pick up a few people who are obviously vetted through us and then we're going to give them the list and they'll pick them up in that time frame uh to see how that goes. Um I mentioned earlier about the trans the trans oh the uh TSP sorry the TSP the transportation system plan the procurement was approved. We had to go back and forth on some negotiations and part of the scope of work but this uh ODOT gave uh ODOT gave us an extra $16,000 for the plan. So um luckily we got the extra $16,000 for that for the deliverable. Um Greg also just put an order in this week. I mentioned a few weeks ago in one of my emails that we had that $5,000 grant for from CIS for sewer inspection. Um, we got something a little better for about 8,000. So, we still have 5,000 we're going to get from CIS. We want to make sure it's not going to be something that tears apart in a few months or a few years. We want to make sure it's going to last us a while. Um, but regardless, it's going to help us. It's going to help us reduce our yearly INI uh capital improvement that we're putting in $50,000 for every year. We'll actually be able to actually TV and camera the sewer. So then we'll just need somebody to come in and seal, clean and seal. So um we actually looked at looking at Newberg and McMinnville if they would take that capacity on for us um instead of going to Orvac or another um firm, but they don't have the capacity for that. So we'll continue working with Orvac on that. And um next month we I emailed the COG because the COG is in transition right now, but next month we'll be um confirming my yearly review structure. So um and then there's some updates on public works that Greg will share. The first one um is regarding uh the water

loss. Yeah. So uh as noted by councelor Carwell uh couple months here just in the recent past. Thank you.

Um there's been some discret discrepancy in the water loss report uh for the whole 2025 year. My apologies to all of you for that. Um, that's on me. That's I need to fact check maybe my math a little bit better, if you will. Um, so the 2025 water loss report uh that you all received was not correct. I think this current 17% is more correct. Um we are we are doing something a little differently um for this 26 year if you will. If you notice on the public works report I left out some of the numbers. Uh it has been recommended by some outside agencies that we're working with to help us with this water loss to not use so many meters to compile this water loss. Uh when you get into these bigger meters uh they are plus or minus accurate of about 3%. So the more larger meters that you use, the more the accuracy tends to deviate. So it has been recommended to use the two master meters at the source. So that's where this public works report for February comes to you is it's it we're necking down from four meters to 2 meters.

17% is still good. It's still an improvement from what we have been. So it's still an improvement, but we thought it was close to like 12%. So that was gave you a standing ovation and stuff. It's not horrible. Yes. But it's not where we had imagined it was going to be. Uh we are working currently to, if you will, still track down this water loss. So do we think we have a leak somewhere? What was that again? Do we think we have a leak somewhere? And does it make sense if we're running on two meters to then run a separate report for the other two meters?

Yes and no. Uh we can most certainly do that if that's what you all want to see. Uh I would not recommend that. Uh because then you're going to have two different numbers and then you're going to try and figure out which number you want to go off of. Yeah. But what I'm saying is would that give us the idea of where the issue may be? So that's where the big discrepancy lies is from Highway 18 to the master meter here on Madison. At times there's a million gallon difference plus and minus. So you can't be plus which we have been

and you most certainly cannot lose a million gallons within what five miles. So there that's where the re came from is just use those two main meters. There's too much discrepancy between the Madison and Dunaway meters to the discrepancy I guess. I mean that's significant because on both ends it's it's hard to say. I you all are aware in the past we've had a water committee. We've used outside agencies to try and figure out this huge water loss. Well, I'm just wondering if their products are faulty and if they need to fix it if there's like a

or calibrated. Maybe there is no water loss. throwing as it travel.

I I wish I could say yes. There's there's no water loss. Every city has a water loss. I understand. My point is you can't really tell us. Well, just the big issue is because and the outside contractors, GSI, the one we've been working with on our water on our water conservation plan, the ones that help us with our our our permit renewals, they came in 2024 and said, "Hey, your water loss was what was it in the low 20s or something?" And I think like, "Okay, cool. That's better than when we first got here. It was like 28% in 2022 and 2023." And then we're like, "Okay." And then I for some reason the 2025 data it was inaccurate. And then um gsi is like well I mean you're still you're still tracking good water loss a big improvement but I I was just concerned how we went from that to this. And we mentioned calibrating the meter. We mentioned hiring somebody to come out here to test those meters. Um we're going to try to do some manual calibrations. Him and Chris. Um I think you've already started doing one of them, right? or no, not yet.

So, my suggestion was to kind of do with what we did with the residential meters, do that field bucket test. Unfortunately, on these larger meters, there's nowhere to pull that water from to do that. See, field test the accuracy of this of this larger meter. The only way to actually test these larger meters would be to A either just go purchase another new meter, pull that old one out, send it in, have it recalibrated and tested and certified. Um, or B, pull that meter out, straight pipe it with no meter, and send it out to have it tested, recalibrated, and certified. these larger meters, you start getting up into, you know, your six, eight, 10 inch meters, you're you're talking some some serious money to replace a meter.

Yeah. And these these larger meters are not that old. I And that's why they're back under warranty. That's what's crazy to me is they're not that old. Yeah. I I suggested to administrator Jos that we don't replace these meters because they're not that old. That that that was brought up that we replace these. I I do find it hard to believe like you mentioned that they are that inaccurate this soon. Yeah. That one was put in after the internet, right? The one will run. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So that's five years old. Six years old. Yeah.

Skipping ahead. Uh, so is there a plan to continue to tackle the water loss issue? There is. Okay. Um, and for a lack of a better way to explain this, it is still a needle in a hay stack to try and find out where this water loss is going or is. So I am here to ask your permission to tackle this the way that we have been doing doing so in the past. One step at a time. Put you in a tough position, man. It it does. Yes, we can try and tackle everything at once, if you will, but then if we find the problem, we're never going to know where we found it. Yeah. I want to know where this problem is so that we can monitor.

So, instead of needle and hackle thing, let's if we if we try and go, you know, both feet in and tackle everything at once, we can end up fixing something and not knowing what we fixed and then not know where we need to monitor it more closely in the future. And yeah, and and the good the good thing is we are I mean with the leak detection software with the new polyline that we're putting in, they actually up they went now, correct me if I'm wrong, on the third leak, you're going to start changing it on the second leak.

Yeah. So, we did change that up. Uh used to on these water service lines, if it's been repaired twice and it leaks again, the third time we replace it, we're going to scale it down one. We repaired it once, now it leaks a second time. We're going to replace it. So, you're talking about the things like on 12th and Graham. Yeah, the same ones. They just replaced it the last time. So, we're getting there maybe steps better than when we all when we all came into our positions, but it's not to where I'd like it to be that 10 to 12% range. So, yeah, that's I own that one. That's my mistake. Uh fat check you were. I don't think it is your mistake. Because like I said, it's like pinning down

and I totally I understand the whole if we look at everything as one, you're not going to be able to Yeah. So I understand quality over quantity and focusing on it. Okay. And then while Greg is here, just one more item he wanted to make aware on the Madison Street project.

So yeah, I left this drawing up on the board um for tonight. Um some of the extra work that we talked about earlier on um the added cost is this being Madison, this being Water Street. This is the new ADA ramp that we're uh putting in when we do the overlay on Madison. There's an existing catch basin right in the middle. So we're moving that catch basin, adding two in. Uh but the problem that we found is that the line from this catch basin to this catch basin is only a three-inch line. Uh who does that? Nobody. Is that like a straw comparison?

Yeah. I mean it's plugged already. We're in the process of trying to jet it to unplug it. Don't know if we're going to be successful at it, but we're going to try it. When you asked who does that, did you say we would all know the answer? Obviously someone did it. Zip. Ziply fiber. Yeah. I mean, that may have been done many, many, many years ago when there wasn't very many houses in there and it could withstand that much run off, but nowadays it just is not industry standard.

Um, we were going to ask the contractor to do it as a change order, upsize it to an 8 in. Um but with it only being about 260 ft from catch basin to catch basin uh public works would like to do that save some money.

So something you do in house there will be some material cost that will go along with that. Um some of it's going to be about 90 yards of rock looking about $2,000. Not horrible. Uh pipe costs maybe another $2,000. Uh, we do have some pipe up at the wershed we can use. I just need to double check the size of it to see if it's the 8 inch or not. Um, we And it' be that plus more if we did a change order. If it was a complete change order and we had the contractor do it, we're probably looking at about 40 to 50,000. Okay, that's the difference.

Uh, there will be a small change order. Yes. And that change order will be our trench line. um for the added uh asphalt when the overlay project starts. Um I don't think it's going to be tens of thousands of dollars worth of asphalt. You're talking maybe that screw another three to four inches on top of the overlay 2 in um you know 260 ft long by 3 ft wide. So it's not not a huge change order. Yeah. How dare you want to do it in house? like we just got to be quick enough before the contractor gets in there before you all approve it.

Yeah, that's what I was going to say. What's your window to get this done? Well, then I understand if other things get tabled in order to get that done. Okay, that's all I had unless any of you had any questions on the water loss or on the storm drain. Same with me question. Um, you can handle um I'm just thinking before this week we were having a uh drought lining up for the summer. How's our reservoirs working up on the hill? Are we doing good? Springs are doing really really good right now.

So for summertime, we're looking at still being uh pretty okay. Or are we going to be uh leaning on Mac water and light a lot? That's always a hit and miss. Yeah. There you go. It all depends on It all depends on on the resident's usage from come summertime. How much they want to water, you know, how much water they want to. There's not red flags compared to other years. Right now, we'll always have to use map water. Try it. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And this rain is most definitely helping us, you know, replenish our well,

right? Sure. Hopefully, like I said, until this week, it was we haven't had any we haven't had any issues with any overflows. So, we're knock on wood. Last year, this time we had some flowing and we were we were talking on the phone tonight. So, I was just worried this morning, but just remember next week's going to be like 66 degrees. So, we're going to be pushing summer almost again. Okay. And Brandon, you said you're done with all your reports. Yeah. Has anybody had any questions? Okay. We will move on to council reports. Council President Pollson, anything. Uh, councelor Ken, no. Councelor Carwell, no. Thank you. Councelor Burroughs, no. Councilor Kit Hill, no. Council Mackey,

no.

Okay, real quick. Mayor's report. Um, councelor Carwell and I did follow up with the resident that came to us last month for um the trailer parking. We had a good conversation that was more a broad conversation than their actual specifics. Um, and there's a few things that good questions that popped into our head that we're exploring and we might bring something to you guys might not, but we did follow up with them. Um, we are about to kick off a campaign. McMinnville School District and McMinville City asked if we would participate in a joint um we care about kids campaign just to heighten the fact that our first responders care about the kids. They've got community support. The city cares about the kids. So, you might be seeing that hashtag coming out. It's part of a joint effort. Um, next week I have open hours to meet with people that have put in applications for the budget and funding commission. So there might be some appointments coming next month. And um, other than that, I'm looking for

I move to adjourn. I second. Okay. All in favor? I Okay. They