Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'd like to call to order this meeting of the Lake Oasiggo Planning Commission, Monday, May 11th, 2026. Uh, Iris, can you please call roll? Nhok here. Bruce here. Mareno is absent. Mitchell is absent. Guinea here. Why here? Wing is absent.

Thank you. Moving on to agenda item three, approval of minutes. We have on the agenda the approval of the minutes from April 27th, 2026. Do I hear a motion to approve the minutes as written or for any uh amendments? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes as written. Second. All right. Motion passes to approve the meet meeting minutes as written for April 27th. Who seconded? I did. Okay. Thank you.

And Iris, do we have anyone signed up for public comment for items not on the agenda tonight? No, we do not. Thank you. Item number five, Commission for Citizen Involvement, general updates. I don't see that we have any general updates. Is that correct? Believe so. Great. That brings us to item number six, our work session. Do we have anyone signed up for public comment in regards to tonight's session? No, we do not.

Thank you. That brings us to item 6.1, reszoning for housing work session number three, PP25-00001. We are conducting a work session on resoning for housing project that will include an overview of the scope of work and initial public engagement concepts for commission consideration. And Michael McName, associate planner, is here to present to us tonight. Good evening. Good evening.

Okay, so yes, this is an update on the reasonzoning for housing project. The last time the commission discussed this project with staff was at their meeting on September 22nd, 2025. Uh since the last time we talked about this project was several months ago, in this presentation, I will briefly go over some of the project background again. uh after which I'll go over the updated anticipated project flow and schedule. Um and one of the purposes of today's meeting is also to get the commission's feedback on concepts for the public engagement plan for this project. So I'll talk about that too before we have time for questions and discussion. As we've discussed before, in 2023, the city adopted a housing needs analysis or HNA, a study that looked at the community's 20-year housing needs and whether there's enough land in the city to meet those needs. This was done in compliance with House Bill 2001, which was passed by the state legislature in 2019. While the city's housing needs analysis identified a deficit in development capacity of just under 2,000 units, should be noted that the state has since changed how they are administering the HNA. The state is now calculating housing need themselves for every city subject to House Bill 2001. That means when Lake OSGO was required to update our HNA in 2029, we will begin using the state's calculation. The projection of housing need calculated by the state is likely to be higher than what the city contemplated in the 2023 HNA. Following the H&A, the city adopted a housing production strategy or HPS in 2024. The HPS serves as a work plan for the city's housing uh efforts through 2030. The state of Oregon holds the city accountable for implementing all strategies in the HPS or making progress towards implementation.

One of the 13 policies identified in the strategy was to reszone land to increase residential development capacity as shown on this implementation uh timeline. This strategy would be accomplished in two phases with the first focusing on commercial and mixed use zones. Uh, city council last year, however, provided guidance to focus added capacity in commercial and mixeduse zones and to depprioritize adding capacity to lowdensity residential zones. The overall purpose of the resoning for housing project is to identify areas of the city zoned for commercial, mixeduse, or non-residential uses that would allow for more housing. Once those areas are identified, zoning scenarios will be developed for consideration by the commission, council, and the public and other stakeholders. Ultimately, this should result in amendments to the zoning map and possibly the comprehensive plan and community development code if needed. To be clear, the project is not intended to convert areas that are primarily developed with commercial or office uses into residential neighborhoods. However, capacity to construct housing in those areas may be uh increased or added. As a reminder, here's where the city's existing mixeduse, commercial, and non-residential zones exist, shown in colors other than white or green. Uh, while the industrial park zone is included in the map, shown in gray in the southwest or bottom left corner, this area is generally not considered appropriate for residential use, so will most likely not be included in reszoning scenarios. To acquire support uh for some of the technical work associated with the project, the city applied for a DLCD housing planning assistance grant to get assistance from a DLCD provided consultant. When we last discussed, the city was still awaiting a decision. Uh but since then, DLCD approved the city's

grant application and paired us with Cascadia Partners. Uh the consultant's work needs to be completed before the end of the state's bienial budget cycle which is June 30th 2027. From that point staff will take the project through the final phase drafting and adopting zoning map and other amendments. Uh this slide shows the project flow which has changed slightly since last September uh because we refined the scope of work once the consultant was selected and the budget was determined. The project kickoff happened at the end of April. Uh the consultant is currently working on the existing conditions analysis. From there, we will determine a methodology to identify focus areas, then analyze those focus areas for reasonzoning potential. The consultant will develop a a zoning alternatives report showing potential reszone scenarios uh for the focus areas out of which staff will draft zoning map amendments along with comprehensive plan community development code amendments if needed. Final step will be to adopt amendments. Planning Commission will be involved at key steps throughout the process including uh when the focus area methodology is being developed during the analysis of focus areas and of course when the amendments are being drafted and adopted. This is the updated project schedule. Project kickoff uh was about 3 weeks ago and the draft public involvement strategy and existing conditions analysis are projected to be done by the end of June. Uh from there we will conduct stakeholder interviews um in se summer 2026 and fall winter 202627. Uh the methodology used to identify resoning focus areas should be done in August 2026. Uh with the meth methodology finalized and focus areas selected in October. After that we will analyze the focus

areas and come up with reasonzoning concepts in early 2027. The zoning alternatives report, which will summarize the potential ways the focus areas could be reszoned, should be completed by the end of June 2027. After that, staff will take the project through the process to draft and adopt amendments with the project ultimately being finished in late 2027 or early 2028. So part of the reason uh staff are in front of you today is to provide you with some early information about the public involvement strategy and gather input from the commission. Uh the public involvement strategy is a plan that will lay out the various actions the city will take to engage the community and other stakeholders to ensure the community's vision and values are reflected in the final project recommendations. Drafting the public involvement strategy is one of the first tasks to complete to be completed now that the project is officially underway. The uh final draft of the public involvement strategy is scheduled to be completed by the end of June. Uh the city is responsible for creating the strategy but with support from the consultant team. The city aims to complete a first draft of the strategy by the end of May for review and input by the consultants. Since a draft hasn't been completed yet, it's not ready for the commission's review. However, staff have comp contemplated several strategies to raise awareness and create a shared vision for the resoning project. Since part of the commission's role is to serve as the city's designated commission for citizen involvement, staff would like to get your input on these concepts and ask for general feedback or ideas uh for community engagement on this project. Uh so far staff envisioned four potential strategies uh to involve the public. Conducting open houses, doing stakeholder interviews, running community surveys, and using various forms of online communication. The scope of work for the project anticipates at least two open houses or

workshops to gather input from the community at key points during the project. The consultant will assist the city with producing materials and running the meetings. Uh the city can choose to activate a contingency contingency task for a third meeting as well. Um at the moment staff think the open houses would cover the following topics. The first openhouse would give an overview of the project and discuss the reasoning methodology. The second would cover the focus areas and zoning alternatives when they are in the process of being developed. And the final one would cover the resoning alternatives report while it's being drafted. uh for stakeholder interviews. Uh the scope of work contemplates up to 10. Um after a discussion with the consultant, the moment staff thinks it makes sense to break them up into two time blocks. One would be in summer 2026 to give stakeholders the opportunity to help shape the methodology to identify focus areas. The other would be in the fall winter of 2026 27 to get additional input while the resoning uh concepts are starting to be formed. Uh some potential stakeholders would be community groups, uh developers, and business groups. Um especially in light of the fact that we're dealing with commercially zoned areas. Um an additional method the city is anticipating using is community surveys. Uh this would be used as a tool to gather community input more widely, especially from people who are unable to attend open houses or workshops. However, the surveys could still be tied to the topics discussed in the open houses and distributed at those meetings. And finally, the city expects to make use of several forms of online communication. Staff will create an online project page with information and updates on the project as it progresses. The city would also maintain a list serve which community members and other stakeholders could subscribe to for updates on the project. City will also

utilize social media posts, uh, press releases, newsletters, and other web-based communications to solicit engagement on the project. As I mentioned, uh, staff is seeking the commission's input on the conceptual elements of the public involvement strategy as the city's designated commission for citizen involvement, uh, including whether there are additional strategies beyond those outlined here, uh, that should be considered. MCM, can I interrupt you? Um, can you give an example of what you're hoping to get from this community involvement other than I think it's just going to be like a bunch of people saying not in my backyard. Like what do you hope to get from these community involvement?

Yeah. I mean, so we Sorry, I was a little I I think I have ste a little bit, but

I think in general we're wanting to be communicative about this project. You know, I think there's um a lot of sort of foundation that we've already laid with the housing production strategy work, whereas um folks know um to a degree to expect this. But I think talking about the specifics um specifically with the idea of like a methodology for looking at specific areas um I'm sorry looking at the specific methodology that we'll use to identify those areas um trying to come to some type of um at least um you know ideally it would be some type of um public uh consensus that this is an appropriate methodology but at minimum making sure that people are aware of that methodology and understand the tie that that methodology has to the requirements that we have through the housing production strategy. Um, you know, I think that's a really crucial component here. Of course, um, you know, there are a lot of folks that are going to have that reaction. I'm I'm sure that, you know, that sort of not in my backyard reaction. Um, at this phase, it is pretty high level. So, we want to look at that citywide. Uh, we want to look at the citywide so that we can keep things um, as sort of uh, non-personal, if you will, as we can. Um and once we identify those focus areas through that sort of more quantifiable um methodology that we hope to um you know produce through this um you know I think that's when we do that more in-depth work with the neighborhoods individually that could be impacted or could see some of these changes come to fruition within their area. So um you know that's kind of going to be a little bit um of the the detail that we'll have to get into when it comes to the um actual adoption of code amendments. So, you know, we've got these um focus areas ultimately that will be the output of the work that the consultants um will be doing for us. Um from then it's, you know, staff's turn to kind of take it from there, if you will. So, there's going to be a lot of um discussions necessary at that point to talk about what does this look like? What does this feel like? What is

appropriate for this area? And I think um that's a lot of the um conversations that I think we can get the most out of with the public is what is most appropriate for this area. And so when we talk about those um sort of sort of analyzing not only the different alternatives but analyzing the different um potential kind of reasonzoning scenarios for those different areas. Um that will be another really important um component where we'll get some feedback from folks about what looks most appropriate, what um is the most sort of um in line with your needs as a community. And I thank you. Um, and I I see this almost really as an opportunity as a two-way information sharing. Um, you know, from our involvement on the commission, I think we're all aware of, you know, the dire need for additional housing within our community. Um, especially in light of the, you know, what is it? Doubling the estimate of the, you know, number of new units that we're going to need that we got from the new housing strategy. And that was pretty shocking to me, you know, to find out. And I think, you know, if we see this as an opportunity not only to get feedback from the community, but also to share information with them about how urgent it is and how communities that do not react well to this will get things sort of forced down upon them, you know, and I think that will really help combat some of that nimism that people might otherwise feel that, hey, we can do this the hard way or the easy way, you know, we're trying to do it the easy way where we plan things out and have it be controlled and structured. and fit within the community. But if you don't like that, you can go look at the, you know, the the hotels that have been converted into homeless shelters in other places. And that's what the state of Oregon is saying they're going to do here if we don't, you know, up our game, basically. Does that make sense?

Yeah. I think the thought that I was struggling to express was there might not be a ton of room to say just to just say no because we're held to this by the state, but there is room to say how. And that's a big part of the purpose of Thank you. involving the public. So, thank you. Sorry to interrupt. No, I we're pretty much at the end. So,

absolutely. Yeah. I think the trade-off sort of piece is really important though to think about, well, if this doesn't happen, what could we be, you know, looking at as a community? And I think, you know, we could talk about the rising cost of housing and the affordability crisis that we're all experiencing in the state. Um, or we could talk about the measures that the state could employ if we're found to be, you know, a a quoteunquote bad actor, if we're not sort of meeting our housing obligation, what that could look like. um you know it's something that I don't think um you know I think the state has been somewhat uh loose in terms of its description of what that could look like at this point but um we knew we we do know that there are um model codes and things of that nature that could um you know sort of be um employed here and and you know there could be a lot of different types of action that this the state could take. So I think that's a good point that um you know we we need to talk about those trade-offs very in depth and and um yeah present things I think in a very uh straightforward manner because I think the information sharing piece is crucial

and really try to frame it as you know city of Lake Asiggo wants to be a leader an example for the state of how you can build affordable housing in a community and still maintain that character and you know the city is kind of known as you know from outside circles as sort of a haven of the elites and to try to combat that by showing that our city really does care about providing affordable housing for people from all different types of communities and here are the tangible things the steps that the city is taking to increase that availability of affordable housing. Seems like that would be almost as important as getting the community feedback but also laying the groundwork for showing how we can set an example for the rest of the state here.

Absolutely. And I think, you know, just to kind of build on um some of what Michael is pointing out, you know, we're talking um with the business community, you know, I think there's a lot of buyin that we could establish through this process. Um um specifically with folks that we've talked to in the business community that I've expressed, a lot of desire for having housing available adjacent to their places of employment that is actually affordable to their employees and and having that workforce housing um adjacent where their their their um office locations are. um specifically in some of the areas on the west side of the city. So I think that's a real opportunity here and to the extent that we can get buy in more broadly I think that's another huge opportunity. Thank you. Yeah,

I have a question uh that will help us get to these questions. Um, can you clarify for me whether this resoning work is limited strictly to land inside the current Lake Asiggo city limits or whether the project will also evaluate areas outside li city limits but within the broader planning context I think like Stafford Hamlet those sort of areas um I want to understand whether it's purely an internal capacity exercise or if we're also considering like the long the regional growth assumptions I believe and Eric can correct me if I'm wrong but I I believe it does focus only on land that is within city limits.

As a part of the housing production strategy, we had this conversation about, you know, where can we expand, where should we explore and I think um, you know, there's a lot of reticence to think about expanding our urban growth boundary for the sole reason that providing infrastructure to those areas is extremely costly. Um there are a lot of other barriers when it comes to just logistical um planning um sort of agreements that have been made for um the Stafford triangle in particular the intergovernmental agreement the sort of triparty agreement between um Toualatin Westland and Lake Asiggo that kind of um requires all parties to kind of buy in and kind of start that planning process at the same time and there's there's a lot of kind of um larger kind of multi-jurisdictional process that would be required to start talking about that. Um but there's um you know the the real point of this exercise is to make sure that we're exhausting our opportunities within the actual UGB before we take um any steps like that. Okay. So there are a few questions on the screen just as kind of topic or as conversation starters. Um I am happy to guide you through them or if you have other things that you want to discuss that's also fine. Um, but I will let you all decide how you want the conversation to go from here.

Um, maybe I missed this. It might already be in there, but for additional stakeholders, um, people who work in Lake Oiggo, but cannot afford to live in Lake Oiggo, who otherwise would like to live near where they work, I think as you've identified there is kind of um you know we obviously want to be as um inclusive of public uh input as we possibly can but there is kind of quite a few parameters with this process as well. So we don't want to necessarily overpromise um but we we want to include as many people as we can and hear from as many people as we can as well. So that's kind of a a fine line that we're hoping to walk. There anyone else that you all think of as being important stakeholders in this process? Okay. Um, and I understand it's very early to be asking this question, but uh, is there anything you think we should be getting from the community surveys at at this point? Um, we don't have any thing uh, defined so far. One thing I'd like to see either as a question or even not on the surveys but maybe posed to attendees in open houses and forums and things like that um where could housing within the city strengthen underperforming commercial areas because there's a lot of like I you don't see that question framed a lot but there's when you start talking to folks not about housing they'll often bring up oh here this in this particular area of town there's high turnover of businesses

or restaurants or this or bacon storefronts and stuff like that. So the sort of input on trade-offs I think is another thing that we can um try to address in some of these surveys as well and try to get to that. I think

any other thoughts about things that are important to hear from the I mean it's hard to speculate because I think it might be easier if we saw like a starting list of questions and then we could sort of expand on that or build on this and things like that. So, I mean, I've got ideas, but it I think it might be easier to see like what do we have to start with and then we can offer feedback based on that kind of starting point. Understood. Yeah. Apologies. We're still pretty

No, no, no, it's fine. Yeah. No, we're in very early stages. I realize we just got the contract. So, um, but yeah, I share Commissioner Guiney's thoughts on that. And I think if we had a starting set of key questions, then we could maybe supplement that with things that we see as might be missing might be productive.

I would um have some questions asking people how they feel about density and height and where to incorporate density and height. We're in a land constricted city. Most of the land's already been built on and to build more units we have to go more dense which people might not love. So really being targeted with one like laying the groundwork to say, "Hey, that's the direction that we really have to go with what we have here." But to really get people thinking, well, where might that work? Where might that be appropriate? definitely something we're planning on talking to them about. And as you can probably see, we're kind of hoping to utilize the planning commission as a sounding board, I think, throughout this process. So, we're going to um I think involve you a little bit more than we might usually almost like an advisory committee um throughout this process. So, I think um you know, we'll be asking you um these a little bit more detailed questions I think more frequently. Yeah, I'd like to kind of second what Rachel is saying. I think there's going to be a big um difference between when you hear zone reszone for residential, are you thinking reszone for large single family lots? Are you thinking reszone for dense apartments and garden style town homes, whatever? There's going to be definitely um a different reaction type you're talking. Yeah, I think um it's probably worth pointing out that a lot of you know the areas that we'd be focusing on do um allow residential to some extent not all of them but many of them especially the mixed use zones of course um but you know I think a lot of what we're hoping to accomplish here is making the residential work better um within those districts which are you know I think

primarily envisioned as something like an office district when um we received that resoning request late last year for the property on Cruiseway Place that was very specifically the issue that they're hoping to tackle there. And I think um yeah, that's going to be another I think that'll be a recurring theme throughout that. So I think um you know it might be beneficial to this effort that we're starting in areas where um higher density residential uses are already allowed to some capacity. But um I would uh you know I guess there's a few things here. A we need all types of housing within the city. So, it's hard to say we're we're only going to do one of those things, but I think um the fact that we are going to be focusing in primarily those existing commercial areas which already have that higher density will mean that we're probably talking um medium to high density housing for the most part here. Um but as as you pointed out, that is an important detail.

Yes. And I think something that I'm realizing from the work on the foothills district is approaching reasonzoning conversations as building in adaptability as sustainability for the future. Um people seem to be a little bit more open to that. That it's not that we are changing it right now from this to that. It's we're thinking what is the future like? What is the market like? Can we open up new opportunities to be more responsive to an uncertain future? Um, not hearing any other thoughts on uh survey topics. I'll move on to the final question that we have. Um, are there any additional public involvement strategies? And I'll just go back to the last slide. So, beyond these four that we're contemplating, is there anything else that comes to your mind that you think?

I would suggest seeing if it is feasible within a 30 minute drive of where we are to take a bus tour to a community that is having success with this. Um, I'm every week that goes by, I'm more anxious about a development that's in town here, a a mixed a a re a redevelopment um for new housing uh that has not sold one unit yet. Um, and the the narrative around the potential narrative around well, if we do that, we you know, where's it done right and where is their demand and where if we build these housing, will people move in and be housed right away? And if we if there is a if there is such a place in Tiger Towitin or Oregon City or Westland or somewhere within 30 minutes um Fair Housing Council of Oregon for for decades has done bus tours. Um it's a you know it's a pretty powerful thing if if it if it works if there's a right spot and you have interested parties and it's you know within 30 minutes or something like that. Just my idea. always open to um getting out and about when it's nice weather and uh getting out of the uh council chambers when we have a chance. So, okay. Um so, I guess I'll just open it up to kind of general feedback or questions um either about the public involvement strategy or if you have questions about the project overall. Um,

do you expect we'll get more clarity from the state as far as implementation timelines of their uh you mentioned 2029 we have to start adopting their processes but we're not the only community that's getting refinements uh from DLCD and I'm wondering if you know as we go along with this process are we built in that they might come back and say there's a different number if there there's another full legislative session coming up next Well, the the year 2029 comes from uh when we have to update our HNI hna. Um and that's just because we adopted it in 2023. Um so that it's going to be different for different communities. Um, and yeah, I don't know if you have any more to add, but

yeah, I think um I think that this is going to be a central sort of tension point with this project because we um know what our targets are likely to be. Of course, things are likely to change between now and 2029, but we do know that we will be held to that higher um you know number, that higher um projection in the future for our HNA. And so the work that we do between now and then is only projecting or you know only um looking at that 2,000 um capacity number and thinking how are we going to get to that number um that we had back in 2023. We could be setting ourselves up for a really difficult conversation starting in 2029 or or whenever we have the HPS which would be um 2030 I suppose at that point. But um you know I think the um it is a difficult question to answer because I think that is probably um you know what DLCD is going to actually hold us to that sort of what's in the HPS. I think that's what um you know that that's the number that we are going to be um held to at least for this midterm reporting effort that we're going to be asked to do for next year um when we look back and try to you know um quantify some of what we're doing for the state to show them the impact of our HPS. Um so really you know it's we are caught in a weird place in that respect. you know, we're kind of in between and, you know, I don't want us to be, you know, I think that's a big part of why I brought somebody um from DLC to talk about this to council and we talked about this in February at the planning commission um that these numbers are changing and you know, the current projection looks like two and a half times what we had projected in 2023. Um so that's something we need to uh really be thinking quite a bit about. You know, I think um it would be in some ways quite shortsighted not to do so. Um but in terms of what we're actually you know required to do by the certain time you know that's that's a different question. So it'll be um you know I think there's different ways that we can approach it

but um very specifically we did you know work with um both the consultant in Cascadia as well as um DLCD who were getting you know the sort of grant administered through and who was also going to be kind of um you know measuring our progress at that midterm stage for the HPS. so we can talk to them and ask them these questions. And we made sure to incorporate specifically like the language, the actual language in our HPS um approval letter to make sure that we're addressing specifically what is needed for the HPS requirements that they have for us. So we are um you know making sure that the methodology in particular can quantify some of these changes um so that we know kind of what the sort of um the delta would be for different neighborhoods and different sort of commercial areas where we could focus. Um but it might be the case that we aren't able to implement or um adopt code amendments in each of the focus areas right away. Maybe some of those have to happen at a later stage. So, um, you know, that's that's kind of a council question in terms of ultimately what that um that's going to unfold like. But, um, that's why we want to be at least as clear as possible that, hey, this is this is going to go up significantly and we don't want to be caught flatfooted in 2029. So there's no good no good answer but a very good question and we're going to have to keep answering it or asking it the whole um process I think

like no further questions. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good feedback. Item number seven, other business. Do we have any other business to discuss tonight? Yeah, I um just wanted to know, you know, I um I didn't realize this until a little bit too late, but tonight is actually going to be Iris McCab's last night as a planning commission uh staff support. So, um she'll uh be retiring at the end of this month. I don't know if you want to say anything more. I don't want to speak for you.

Yes, I've been with the um city for a little over 28 years. That entire time I have supported the planning commission. I've seen lots of commissioners over the years and I've seen a lot of projects come and go along with staff and I have to tell you that you guys have set uh an example and a bar that's I don't think anybody can surpass it because I've gone to my my hometown and expect similar similar service and it's just not there. and the dedication that you guys take out of your day and away from your families and all of the documents that you have to read and review. I know because we've all looked at them and gone through them. It's amazing and and it's just so admirable and amazing that you guys do that. And I hope that the people that live here in Lake Asiggo appreciate what you're doing because I know I do. And um I think the staff here are amazing too because they have to put all of that information together to get it to you. And so it's been an honor working for the city and supporting the planning commission all these years. Thank you.

Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you, Iris. So humble. Iris is obviously a big part of putting those packages together as well. So don't Well, you'll be missed. Yes. Thank you. All right. Uh item eight, schedule review.

All right. So, um we probably mentioned this before, but um this is part of the reason why it's Iris's last meeting is because our May 28th meeting is cancelled. Um so, we don't have a meeting on May 28th, but our next meeting after that is going to be a big one. Um, so we're going to have a hearing on the tree regulation amendments um here at the planning commission um based on some uh recent uh city council meetings. We expect there to be a lot of um interest in that. So I think um that could be fairly well attended um as far as planning commission meetings go at least. Um and in addition to the hearing, we will have an update on the Foothills District planning efforts. um uh Commissioner Nhach of course is um involved with the CAC. So, we're talking about this kind of on a parallel track, but you will be getting your um presentation related to the conceptual plan alternatives that we've developed. Really starting to translate some of the recent conversations that we've had about vision and um goals and objectives for the district into actual tangible um concepts for how to connect downtown to Hills Park and how to um design um sort of a new neighborhood really in in the process. So, um it'll be great to get your thoughts on that. It'll still be a fairly high level conversation, but um we'll be moving uh quickly um at least from that sort of vision to those concepts. And then um later this summer on July 27th, we'll talk to you a little bit more about schematic design alternatives, so even more refined concepts. So um June 8th, we have two really big items, one foothills, one tree regulations. Um June 22nd will be a little bit more light on the agenda. That's um just adoption of findings for the true regulation amendments. Of course, if that hearing is continued, then we would just do a continued hearing. In the case that it is just the findings adoption though, we would be holding that remotely just because it's just that one item. Um and on July 13th, um we're hoping to give you an update

kind of similar to what we did tonight with the resoning, but for the code audit and amendments project. Um similarly um in a state where we just um have um been finalizing a contract with a consultant team to get going on that uh work and um have a scope that's been finalized for that and a lot of um a lot more detail to I guess share with you on that front. So uh really just kind of um wanted to let you all know that we've made progress on that and talk to you about what that progress looks like um in early July. And um as I mentioned just a moment ago, we'll have another work session on Foothills at the end of July on the 27th. So um we'll have a momentous couple of months thereafter um the canceled meeting this month.

Great. Thank you. And with that, we are adjourned.