City Council - workshop

and considered separately number one the agenda agenda Lebanon City Council agenda August 12 2026 number twos the board meetings from the Planning Commission June 17 2026 senior disabled and disabled services advisory advisory committee I'm having one of those nights January 21st and April 15th, 2026. Council meetings is the number third regular meeting, July 7th, 2026. Is there any objections or is there a motion?

Move to approve. Second.

Motion been made to approve the consent calendar. It's been second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion passes. We don't have any presentations or recognitions tonight, but we do have and we'll move on to public comments. Citizens may address the council by filling out a testimony card prior to speaking and handing it to the city recorder. Each citizen will provide up to five minutes, will be provided up to five minutes to provide comment to the council. The council may take an additional two minutes to ask clarifying questions. The city recorder will accept and distribute written comments at speaker's request. We have two tonight. Up first is from ward one is Brian.

Yep, there you go. All right. So my name is Brian Bradburn. I live over on D Street near 12th Street. And there is a space along there where big rigs get to park. Apparently, you know, semi trucks with trailers park along 12th Street. And that in itself is not a real big deal. But on one side of 12th Street, there are neighborhoods. There is a memory care facility. And on the other side of 12th Street, there is a largely open wooded lot, but also not far from that, a neighborhood on the other side. The problem is that some of these big rigs, one in particular, one particular trucking company, And I believe probably just one driver from that trucking company who probably lives in the area has been parking there and leaving his refrigerated trailer running, the generator running all night long. And as you might imagine, like, you know, some people have refrigerators, older ones that make more noise than the newer ones. Well, a refrigerated truck generator makes quite a bit of noise and it actually can create a hum inside of a house. It kind of reverbs off the walls. I have been experiencing this. I have, in full disclosure, I have a vestibular disorder, my inner ear. It's called cochlear hydrops. It can cause, when I have low rumbling noises and stuff like that, it increases tinnitus to the point of not being able to engage in conversation very well. It can give me vertigo for months on end. It can cause actual physical pain called hyperacusis. And it does some other stuff too. In order to keep it short, I'm just gonna say, I understand that, you know, not every neighborhood can be um set up ideally for everybody with every medical condition right i'm just i'm spelling this out for you in the bidding so that you know what my situation is there are more people in the neighborhood than just me that are affected by these refrigerated trailers i've talked to several neighbors one neighbor actually told me that he had to move his bedroom to the opposite side of his house move entire you know relocate, you know, swap one room out for the other because he has not been able to sleep. Especially when it comes to like the memory care facility, these are people that for the most part probably cannot advocate for themselves very well. I kind of worry about, you know, what they might be suffering through because, you know, if you think about people with memory care, they're older, they're already having cognitive problems. low base kind of hum that just infiltrates the house and bounces off of every wall in my house at least if they're going through that i i can you know imagine the suffering where they can't get up and leave personally i live where i live and i i pay rent for that right um there's places that i can go sometimes you know like on some weekends i get up and leave you know but you know a lot of times i work i work from home as well i have an in-home office that i do 50 of my work from so There are times that I'm having medical issues as a result of this. I'm certainly losing a lot of sleep. And if it goes on in the daytime, then I'm losing my ability to earn money, right? Because it's kind of reverbing off every room in the house. I can't sit and make phone calls and run business and do the things I need to do. In the letter that I provided, I run down through my entire history of contacting this trucking company and what they've told me. Some of the things that they've told me have been that they have a policy against drivers parking near residential areas. They have told me that they understand that their generators are loud, too loud for people to be around, and that's why they have that policy. They've told me it's all kind of spelled out in there, and I know that my time's running low. I'm just going to skip through all that. I'm going to say that I have tried to call the police about this issue. They tell me there's nothing they can do because there's no statute on the books. They pull out a decibel meter and they say it doesn't meet the decibel threshold, but the problem with that is it's not really a decibel issue. It is a frequency issue that causes the walls to basically hum inside the house. You know, a decibel meter is not going to cure that. But they claim that there's nothing that they can do as far as writing a citation or making this stop. I've got 30 seconds left. I will just tell you that I have at one point, in addition to addressing this with the trucking company, I left a note on the windshield of one of these trucks. And the guy wrote back the next time that he parked there. He says, basically, if you shut off my generator, you're going to be held liable. Um, you know, I'm, I'm legal to park here. Smile. You're on camera. So he's basically thumbing his nose at the situation and I'm hoping that there's something that we can do. Number 1, he says that he has permission from the city to park his refrigerated truck there. So my question is, is that true in it? Whether that's true or not true. I would like to move forward with something that can. uh an ordinance or whatever it takes policy to prohibit that just the generator part i don't care if trucks park there nobody cares if trucks park there but the generators become a real problem so my time's up all righty before you take off does the council have any questions or anything how many days a week does this happen and how far would you estimate you are from the street From 12th Street, I don't know, I'm probably within 100 yards. The trucks park kind of staggered. Sometimes they're cleared down by the memory care place. Sometimes they're right there by D Street. I don't really know as far as like a measurement. I'd be just kind of wildly guessing on that. How many times has it happened? I think it's happened like a total of seven times. There was a period right after I first contacted the trucking company where it didn't happen for a year. And I thought, good, problem solved. But it's recently started happening again, and it's happened like four times over the last few months. And all the dates and everything are spelled out in the letter that I provided.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Chairman, do you have a question?

I think Dave asked it. In addition to like how often, how long is this happening? Is this generator running all night long?

Yes, it starts usually about 9.30, 10.30 at night. And in spite of my calls to the company and they try to reach the driver, it continues on until about 7 or 8 o'clock in the morning. So it's all night long. And my head's pretty much a wreck by morning time.

And the companies indicated that they are trying to tell the driver they can't do that, and the drivers did not?

They have indicated that they have called the driver. I've talked to their safety supervisor guy, actually two of those guys in that department, and they have both said that their drivers are specifically not supposed to park next to residential areas because of the hum. and that they will try to reach that driver and they'll do whatever they have to do in order to make it stop, but yet it doesn't stop. So I don't know if it's just a particular driver problem or if the company is just, their actions aren't matching their words. But I think at this point, in order for me and some of the other neighbors in the neighborhood to get any peace out of it, there needs to be a prohibition on at least the generator part. Like I said, I don't care about the trucks parking there. I don't know that that's hurting anybody, but the generators are definitely a problem.

What's your actual address?

965 West E. If I'm not mistaken, there was another one of your neighbors was complaining about it. Actually, I've seen it on the buzz before you'd even mentioned it. I've seen this before.

I saw that too. It does not surprise me.

No.

Ryan, is there more than one truck that does this, or is it just one truck?

It's I believe it's one driver. There are multiple trucks from this company that usually it's one truck parks there and there's like three trailers that match that company and two of them will be off one or two of them will be off and then one will be on and that's the one hooked to the truck. So I don't know whether it's one driver that comes in and I mean, to me, in my head, what I'm envisioning is he lives in the area. The trucking company is based out of Washington, so he's probably coming down here, staying the night, and then getting up and going down south or, you know, vice versa, back and forth. And he probably parks various trailers there. But when he's on his route, he leaves that one refrigerated truck running.

So there's always a trailer there without the truck?

Not always, but often.

And the trailer's got a generator that's running all the time?

When it's there at night from the time that he parks it until the time he leaves in the morning It's running it cycles like a refrigerator It'll be on for 20 minutes off for 10 minutes and then back on And it's usually set to like I've seen it at minus 11. I've seen it at minus 20 degrees So it's not like it's set to some moderate temperature. It's basically a freezer on wheels and So it's got to be running out are there are drivers are they staying in the truck or they are they know live somewhere there close or my initial assumption is that they were sleeping in the truck and so I knocked on the windows and after doing that for like 15 minutes that's when I made my first call to the company and that's when I learned that they have a driver that lives in the neighborhood somewhere and and just parked his truck there and goes and sleeps for the night, ironically, right? He's getting sleep for the night. Some of us are not. And then he gets up and heads out and does whatever his agenda is at 7 or 8 o'clock in the morning. They won't identify the guy to me. So my only ability to try and reach out to him is by putting a note on the windshield, which he basically gave me a big middle finger about.

How many times have you called the police department about it? I think two. And do you remember who you talked to?

I don't, young officers, I mean, you know.

As I understand it, that area, because I ride my bike past there, that's designated as truck parking, right? Correct. Yeah.

And Ron, maybe you know, is it in the city? Because there's some of those areas right there that are in the county as well.

No, that's city. It's ours. We did that, oh, I don't remember how many years ago. We had a lot of overnight camping there. And so plus we had several truck drivers in the area that were needing places to park. So I think we signed it as truck parking only. I don't remember the exact language on the signs, but that's what it was set up for. It'd be really difficult to, I suppose we could put a sign that says no refrigerated trucks.

I remember us dealing with the same very issue several years back and so I was trying to remember everything that we did in regards to that complaint because it was another refrigerated truck that was running and honestly I can't remember to go back that far but we did do some things to help curb that issue but I'd have to go back and take a look so I'll get your name and number afterwards and we'll get in contact with you, see if we can't help you out on that aspect.

We might be able to resign it in a way that would limit where you couldn't have anything running there.

And I think that's what we, I thought that's what we were doing or was going to do or did do. I just can't remember the exact area and the exact date and time. But I know we've addressed this issue with refrigerated trucks specifically because we were having the same issue several years back. But I just honestly can't remember. I'd have to go back and look and see what we did to address that issue. But. The officers are right. There's not a whole lot we can do at the time, but we can certainly take a look and see what we can do to prevent it from going on.

That would be awesome. Can't fix the past, but I would love to fix the future going forward. I will just say that the truck driver apparently told the customer service or receptionist, whoever I got a hold of when I called in the middle of the night the first time, apparently she contacted him by phone. and was able to see by their computer and the trailer number where he was parked. And she contacted him, and he said that he specifically had an agreement with the city that allowed him to park there and do that. So I don't know if that's fabrication or enhancement on his part, but.

We don't have any agreements I think the ordinance just doesn't prevent him from it. That's right. It has you at this point until we address this somehow through our policy to not go and unplug it. Cause you'd kind of be by our rules right now, you'd kind of would be on the hook for anything that was ruined in the truck. If you, if you damaged his refrigerator, that's, that's how I looked into it.

At least I'm an old lawyer, but yeah, several years back it was designated as truck parking only. And then it turned into other people parking there. So we went through and, and address those issues. And along with those issues came along with the refrigerated running of the truck. And like I said, I have to go back and look and see how we address that issue because it was one specific driver. And I don't know if it's the same driver or not, but I would suspect not be, but I don't know. So if you have any questions, definitely take a look and yeah, I'll get a copy of your information and I'll get in touch with you at some point.

I appreciate that.

Come and talk to us.

I would not more questions. I would not be opposed. Just, just my opinion here. I would not be opposed to an ordinance stating that, uh, that you can't run motors or refrigerated trucks all night in the city limits.

Yeah. Cause next they'll just be running the truck all night.

That's right. Yeah. And, uh, you know, I used to drive a truck and, you know, I know how that, I know how that game goes and, you know, that driver will play it. Until somebody stops him. I mean, he's just going to go, go, go.

That's why I'm here.

Well, let us do our due diligence on this issue and see what we can do. All righty? All right. I appreciate it.

Thank you. Do you need me to stay, or am I good?

Make sure the chief gets your information.

Okay. Can he get it from the card you left?

Okay. All righty. Thank you so much.

Thank you. I appreciate it. You just handed this to me.

We have the next on the docket. Tonight is Rita Olson. City recorder will read a letter that she wrote, and it's concerning Republic Services complaint.

To City Council, I have been very pleased with the services provided by Republic Services in the past. A recent incident makes me very unhappy. Branches from a tree needed to be removed. I called Republic and arranged for a pickup. A truck came early in the appointed day. A man got out, put on one glove, looked at the branches. He walked around while talking on his phone. This took about 10 minutes, then he drove off. I got a call from the office stating I would have to pay about $200 for the job. We don't do landscaping. I said I was not happy about it, but I had a family event was coming up and I needed the work done. A few minutes later, the truck came back. A different man came out and put both gloves on. In 10 minutes, he had loaded up all the branches and the truck left. The office claims that because I agreed to the price, there was nothing that could be done. I think the first man should be counseled about his work ethics and the second committed for a good work. I also don't think 10 minutes work should be cost $200.

Does it say what word that is?

She does not. I do have an address so I can follow up with that. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Was there any other questions concerning the letter? Okay, that concludes the public comments. We'll be moving on to public hearings. First one, well, the only one, public hearing, for the comprehensive plan and zoning map amendments for the plan development and subdivision on Stoltz Hill. I'm going to turn it over to the city attorney for his words.

For his enlightening? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Tonight's hearing will be pursuant to the quasi-judicial hearing procedure set out in Oregon law. Tonight's hearing will be pursuant to ORS 197.797. At the start of the hearing, we will ask all council members if they need to disclose any ex parte contact, communications, conflict of interest, or bias. The applicable substantive criteria for this hearing has been addressed in not only the notice, but will also be addressed in the staff report to council. Testimonies may be in oral or written form, but must be directed towards the criteria outlined in the staff report, the comprehensive plan, or the city's land use regulations. Any issue raised must be accompanied by statements and evidence sufficient enough to allow the council and party members an opportunity to respond. Please note that failure to raise an issue, including constitutional issues by the close of the hearing, will prevent any appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals. Mr. Mayor, with that, you can ask if there's any ex parte contact, conflict of interest, or bias.

Does anybody have anything to declare as it pertains to those items? Nope. No one spoke up, so apparently there's no declarations. So we'll move on to public hearing is open now at 619. Will the Development Service Director please present your report?

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Tonight's hearing is for two related land use applications for Emerald Crossing properties, Comprehensive Plan Map CPMA 26-01 and Zone Map Amendment ZMA 2601. The Planning Commission reviewed the broader four application proposals on July 15th. and has recommended approval for both these two map amendments. Council's decision tonight are limited to the comprehensive plan map amendment and zone map amendment. And I will briefly review the properties, the requested map change, the applicable findings, relationship to the other development applications and the airport related testimony received by the city. This slide compares the property's existing designation on the left with the proposed designation on the right. Tax slots 2300 and 2305 are outlined and labeled on both maps. The two properties consist of approximately 57 acres located west of Stoltz Hill Road and north of Oak Creek. As shown on the left, the western approximately 39-acre portion is currently designated and zoned industrial, while the remaining is designated and zoned residential mixed density. As shown on the right, the applicant is requesting a single mixed use comprehensive plan designation and mixed use zoning districts across both parcels. This would create a unified planning framework for the properties. The surrounding comprehensive plan and zoning designations would remain unchanged. A key part of the staff's review focused on the proposed conversion of industrial portion of the property to mixed use. Staff evaluated the request using the applicable comprehensive plan policies, the admitted criteria in the Lebanon Development Code, the city's adopted economic opportunity analysis, surrounding development patterns, the ability of urban services, and the property's long-term development potential. A substantial portion of the property is constrained by Oak Creek, wetlands, riparian areas and the floodplain. These conditions significantly limit the amount of land that is developable. Staff found that re-designating the property would be consistent with the city's adopted economic opportunity analysis. It would not adversely affect the city's inventory of employment land. Approximately 128 acres of industrial designated land would remain within the urban growth boundary. the proposed mixed use designation would continue to allow commercial and other employment generated uses while also providing flexibility to address identifying housing needs. Based on the property's physical characteristics surrounding development patterns and the applicable approval criteria, staff finds that the proposed mixed use designation better reflects the property's long-term development potential. The amendment supports orderly urban development, allows for efficient extension of public infrastructure, maintains compatibility with surrounding development, and satisfies the applicable approval criteria. The Emerald Crossing proposal included four related applications that are subject to different decision authorities. The two applications before Council tonight are the comprehensive plan map amendment and the zone map amendment. Planning Commission reviewed all four application and recommends that Council approve the two map amendments. The Commission separately approved plan development PD 26-02 and the preliminary subdivision 26-3 contingent upon these map amendments. This map shows the subject properties in black, outlined in black, and the portions subject to the city's airport overlay shown in orange. The airport overlay is already adopted and will remain fully applicable regardless of whether these requested map plan and map amendments are approved. When the city adopted the airport overlay standard in 2008, both the Oregon Department of Aviation and Oregon Pilots Association received notice of the planning commission and city council proceedings and were provided an opportunity to comment. These adopted standards remain the applicable local requirements for development within this overlay. During the review of this proposal, Oregon Department of Aviation submitted additional comments to the planning commission regarding airport compatibility and future development. The commission considered these comments and incorporated additional findings and conditions of approval into a separate plan development and preliminary subdivision decision. These conditions require applicable FAA and Oregon Department of Aviation notice and review before future building permits are issued. After the council packet was published, the city received written testimony from Oregon Pilots Association. This letter has been provided to councils in this evening as a supplement public comment. It raises concern regarding airport compatibility, height limitations, pilot safety, and potential effects on future airport operations. Staff has not independently verified the calculations contained in the letter. Council should consider that letter as part of the record under the adopted comprehensive plan map amendment and zone map amendments approval criteria. This testimony does not establish new approval criteria or replace the city's adopted airport overlay standards. Based on the findings and evidence and record, the Planning Commission recommends approval comprehensive plan map amendment and the zone map amendment. Staff recommends that council consider the testimony received during the public hearing and approve ordinance 3048, redesignation and rezone the subject property to mixed use. That concludes my presentation and I'm available to answer any questions.

Council, have any questions, please?

I cannot see, what roads does this entail? Is this more towards the racetrack or is this more towards the airport? I can't read the streets on here. I see Stoltz Hill, but I can't.

Let me see if I can get you a map.

I see the map. I just can't read the streets for some reason. They're very blurry on here.

There's one picture, I think, on something presented that has a picture where you can see where the racetrack is up above it and where this tees into Walker Road and creates a new stretch out from Stoltz Hill.

Gotcha.

Does this one work, this map for you?

No, that's okay. I can answer it.

I think I found that in the plan. So you're saying that, because we just got the thing from the Pilots Association, our ordinance already addresses their concerns. Is that kind of what you're saying? Correct. Okay.

Thank you. Any other questions? Alrighty, then I'll move on. Would the applicant like to come forward?

Yes, please.

Please.

Good evening. I'm Matthew Konser of the Konser Group. My address is 1010 Airport Road, Southeast Albany, Oregon 97321. Excuse me. My brothers, Greg and I, Greg Stewart and myself are the applicants. We're glad to be here. We appreciate you all being here on this nice summer evening to hear our application. The Konser family, our dad, Jim, my brothers and I have been in the housing and real estate business for decades here in the Willamette Valley. Our office is in Albany. Our family business started in 1973 in Corvallis. We moved out to old Highway 34 out past the Mennonite home and were there for years. Then we moved into Albany to Airport Road up the street from Kohl's and Costco. Our family business celebrated our 50 year anniversary three years ago. We were in the manufactured home business for many years. We delivered and installed nearly a thousand homes throughout the valley. We got permits and installed some of the first manufactured homes permitted on city lots in this area, including here in Lebanon. We then became a home builder and a developer. We built the first modern single family residential subdivisions in Tangent, Millersburg, and North Albany. We were involved with developing Columbus Green's mobile home park near the Mennonite Village in Albany. Our father assembled the land for what is now the Heritage Mall, home to Target, Old Navy, and Hobby Lobby. And we brought Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse to Albany at Oak Street. Lowe's was so happy to secure a site in Albany near their established Lebanon Distribution Center. We've been developing real estate and providing homes in this area for decades. We are not a foreign corporation. We have lived, worked, and taken risks and invested in this area longer than most have lived here. We are very proud of our track record of successful, tasteful, quality projects and homes and our reputation. And we're very proud of the application our team has put together for your review tonight. Before we get too far, I would like to thank the city staff for their hard work and for the many meetings they hosted for us and the great feedback they've provided in their high-quality, well-written staff report and the order of approval documents you see before you. We've put a lot of thought and time and effort into the design, functionality, and impact of this proposed neighborhood Emerald Crossing. We liked the idea of honoring the heritage of Lebanon. We wanted to call it Strawberry Prairie. But in checking with the county surveyor, they didn't want another thing named Strawberry Anything to avoid future confusion. And so to recognize this beautiful green valley we all call home, together with the significant new streets that will be constructed as part of this new neighborhood, that's how the name Emerald Crossing came about. As you know, this property is located on Stoltz Hill and goes south to what is mapped in the city's transportation plan as an east-west collector street, a potential Walker Road extension. And with that, let me help orient you, if I may. We'll just use this. Can we use this map? This might, let's go forward a little. Makes a good time since there's... Do you want to use this pointer? Is that you? I've got a pointer here. Let's go down here. OK. That might help. Right here. Help someone. That one help? That orients us better. OK. So I'm going to point this pointer towards you, OK? There is Airport Road. That is Stoltz Hill. That is Walker. That's the Community Bible Church. This is the subject site. This is the racetrack. This is the airport. And you'll see that we are separated from the airport by this parcel owned by someone else. OK? That help? This property is within the city's urban growth boundary. It is within the city limits. It has been so for many years. It is served by city water, city sewer, city storm system, and city streets. It has city mapped zoning designations which intend for this property to be urbanized, to be developed someday. That day has come. And so we present our application which used your adopted comprehensive plan, zoning code, plan development process, and development code together with several meetings with staff as our guide. The first 17 acres of this property are already zoned for this proposed residential use. But rather than come in and ask for a subdivision on that already zoned 17 acres and do a piecemeal phase at a time, we wanted to openly show the long-term overall development pattern and what we hope to accomplish at this location over the next 10 years. To take the guesswork and patchwork out of the discussion, which the city's comp plan amendment, zone change, plan development, and subdivision processes were adopted for, to support, direct, and guide this type of integrated framework for this type of development. With this proposal, we will be making significant improvements, extending city infrastructures. Walker Road, the significant east-west collector, will be the nice new wide street and promenade through this project. 12th Street will be connected to that, as will Leonard Lane and Airway Road at some point in the future. With those, we bring city water, city sewer, street trees and sidewalks, connecting the existing neighborhoods to the new, efficiently looping and connecting the new systems to the old. We designed this project with the intent of introducing new entry-level starter homes and move-down homes, together with some supportive commercial services to complement that. We hope to target that missing middle housing, We've seen narrower lots and smaller starter and move down homes developed successfully in numerous other Willamette Valley cities and thought it would be great to bring these to the citizens of Lebanon. We also felt some neighborhood retail, small commercial center for daily needs and services might serve the existing neighbors and this proposed neighborhood quite well, all within walking distance. We also felt that with smaller lots and smaller homes that some nearby open storage for the homeowner's boats, RVs, and trailers would be a nice potential amenity to serve the area. And so the mixed-use designation made the most sense from our internal discussions and discussions with staff for this comprehensive, integrated, multi-phase project site. Now we have a PowerPoint. We'll back up in that that we'd like to share and walk through the application and the process. Laura LaRock, our planner from Pathfinder Consulting, will take the lead here.

Thank you and good evening. So I will keep mine brief, but wanted to just walk you through the development proposal and the applications for your review this evening. So as Jana had pointed out, there is a four-part application submittal that was submitted to the city for review. Those four applications were reviewed previously by the Planning Commission. And what is before you today is just the comprehensive zone map and comprehensive plan map and zone map amendments seeking your approval tonight. Matthew kind of already oriented you to the site, but mostly wanted to show this in proximity to other landmarks within the community. It is essentially already a mixed use area in itself. It's located by religious institutions, some commercial institutions, as well as residential development. Matthew walked you through the proposal, but just at a glance, it is proposed primarily as residential lots that would be developed. Towards the southern portion, you'll see some hashing and symbols there towards the bottom. Those represent where Oak Creek lies, where a riparian buffer is placed, where a floodplain is located, and where stormwater detention would be created in the future.

Could we back up one slide real quick? You'll notice that about 50% of this site ends up being undeveloped. It's open space or public right away. So we don't get the maximum utilization of this site is roughly 50% based on the natural features that we're avoiding and then the public dedications.

Thank you. And in addition, there will be public infrastructure that's completed, streets, curbs, gutters, roadways. In addition, we've met with the Parks and Trails Committee as well as Build Lebanon Trail. And there is a trail development that would run along the southern portion of this boundary here, connecting to the street system and looping in here. and would connect to future trails that are planned going up towards airport roads.

So about 0.8 miles long if you walk the whole loop.

So the site here shows a red line essentially in the middle of the property. What that destiny is everything to the right hand side or this area here is already zoned a residential destination. This portion over here is the industrial destination. Um, so what is proposed is changing both of those zone destination as well as the comprehensive plan map to a mixed use destination. And what that allows, um, to occur is a mix of uses, including some of these residential single family lots that are denoted here by these squares, um, a potential commercial or multifamily development track here along stolts. And then some areas in here that are preserved for parking or storage in this area. So it does allow for a mix or a blend of uses to occur that would be in accordance to what that zone allows. In addition to the zone, what is not changing is the overlays that are already in place. So as I mentioned before, there's already a number of natural resource overlays that are on this portion of the site. Those include the Oak Creek riparian buffer. It is 50 feet from top of bank. There's this yellow line here, which is a Bonneville Power Administration power line easement where development is unable to occur. There is a 100-year floodplain and wetlands that are mapped in this area. And then this purple triangle here, this is the airport overlay district. And you'll notice the part of the request is to have that mixed use or commercial open parking spaces primarily correspond where this airport overlay takes place. So the approval of a mixed use zone does allow for less density to occur in that area where these overlays take place. Because comments were received, I wanted to just highlight some of the airport overlays and kind of walk you through what these different layers mean. So this portion here that's in yellow, that's where the runway strip is. This area here in green is what's called a runway protection zone. This is a zone where there is little to no development that can occur in that area. The parcels where this zone is overlaid is already owned by airport developer or owner in that area. These three zones are directly from the Lebanon Development Code, and these represent where housing density is limited as additional protection to the airport approach into the airport. So this area here, it's limited to one unit per acre. This area, which is most of the site here, is limited to just two units per acre. And then it increases to four the further away from the airport area that you go. The importance is that, again, is density or residential development that can occur in that area is already restricted by the Lebanon Development Code. This zone is applied over the top of the mixed-use zoning designation that is proposed. So this protection would not change by approving this application before you today. This is just another view. So these are probably for the engineers in the room. It shows a profile. So this here is essentially grade. This portion in the middle represents where the airport landing strip would be located. And then there's some diagonal lines that go out this direction. And what those represent is what's called an imaginary surface. So there is numeric dimensions that are applied to slopes for when airplanes are coming into land or exiting, and they limit any sort of penetrations into this imaginary zone, which essentially removes any possibilities of hazards or interface between aircrafts and buildings, trees, terrain that would occur. This side here, it does show the elevation going south from the site. And then this area here is where the proposed development occurs within that zone.

Does this make sense? So this airplane coming in from the south that's the runway that's maybe an airplane coming in from the north that's the runway going north south Okay, and so our site is begins their airport roads, probably in this area right here that help.

yeah. So this would represent the north property line, and this would represent the south property line. And what this is to illustrate is that even applying a 40-foot height would be allowed within this subdivision or for residential development, it's going to be far below anything that would come close to that protection area. So approximately, and that's if housing gets developed to that 40-foot height. There is likelihood that it could be single family and even less. Single storage. single story, yeah. So it's showing how the development relates to these overlay zones and while housing is proposed to take place potentially within a mixed use zoning district, it is anticipated to occur in this overlay district. It's intended to be restricted in density, which can be complied with with the proposed development. You can see here that the profile would not come anywhere close to that protection area or that imaginary surface that is protected. Yeah, so there is detailed information already included in the record that walks through the decision criteria for the comprehensive plan and zone map amendment. And as staff points out, it essentially goes through the state Oregon's land use goals. It walks through the Lebanon Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, and it walks through their facility plans that accompany the Comprehensive Plan. And our findings and staff both demonstrate that the proposed change from the RM and the industrial zone to the mixed use complies with the goals and policies at both the local and state level. There's a lot of information in there saying that there is adequate support for any sort of development that could occur within those zones. That includes a detailed study of the transportation system plan, any of the facility plans for water, sewer, and storm, and showing that there is capacity to serve potential development that could take place. The last criteria essentially says, does the zone map comply with the comprehensive plan? Because the application is two-part and proposes for the comp plan and zone map designations to both be the same Compliance is found to be met Therefore our proposal meets all of the review criteria As indicated previously the Lebanon Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve all four parts of the application including the applications before you today for the comp plan and zone map amendment And so we are here before you today to ask for city council's approval and also answer any questions that you have about the proposal. Yes, sir.

Is anybody taking consideration to the noise from the racetrack?

I'm sorry, can you repeat that?

Has there been any consideration? Obviously, the racetracks noisy and you know, a lot of people love it. Is there any consideration to where this is located, obviously, to what's going to be happening.

Absolutely. My next bit of testimony is going to address that. If we can hold that question for just a second and I'll address it. As often is the case with these types of land use applications and procedures, it's come to our attention that there are some concerns within the community. We'd like to address those that we are aware of. Racetrack concerns. We understand that there have been some concerns from the racetrack community about new homes, new residents, and potential noise complaints. We recognize Willamette Speedway . We, in fact, sold the former owners, the Arnolds, the manufactured home that still sits on the property back in 1976. We're fully aware of the track's significance and contribution to the area over the years. In our discussions and staff has proposed that we openly inform prospective residents about the proximity of these proposed homes to the existing tract and restrict them from lodging complaints with either a deed restriction or consumer disclosure or easements. We agree that's a good idea. We support that recommended condition of approval and can implement that. We've done similar things in other projects related to adjacent farmland and existing ongoing farming practices. and for drainages that we want to continue to function without interruption going forward. In honor of the track, we've even considered naming the streets after other famous American race tracks like Daytona, Indy, Talladega, et cetera. We're not sure we want to encourage racing or speeding in this neighborhood. Did that address your question, sir? neighbors and citizens neighborhood meeting. Although not required, we held a neighborhood meeting at the community Bible church adjacent to this site on April 14th, 2026. We provided a copy of the notice to the city on April 1st and notices went out to the community the same day. Over the years, we've done many of these types of outreach meetings. We think it's important as a good neighbor to inform your neighbors of your plans, which might affect them. We want to be transparent about our development proposal, and so we had a number of the same exhibits from our application on easels on open display for all to see. Myself and our team were on site from about 5 to 9 PM, available to describe details, answer any questions from attendees. Frankly, we received overwhelming support from most of the neighbors and attendees. Recognizing that this will be a change to the landscape, some will not be in favor. As mentioned before, this property is in the UGB, the city limits, has zoning and city utilities and street connections. The intention of those designations, it will be developed someday. But this will not happen overnight. The change will be gradual. FAA Lebanon Airport. We reached out to the FAA several times hoping to have a call or a face-to-face meeting with them to show them our plans, but that has not materialized. Much like the wetland permits we'll need to pursue, which processes take place after our land use approvals and are done separately with several state and federal agencies, we will have forms to complete and separate processes to go through with the FAA. We don't have a process to go through with the Oregon Pilots Association. They don't regulate the Lebanon Airport. Like all the city's overlay zones, section 16.11 of the code, which apply to some portions of this site, i.e. the riparian protection overlay zone, the floodplain overlay zone, it's our belief and understanding that we designed our project to comply with the city's adopted airport overlay zone plan. Of particular importance is the runway protection zone, which limits the density, which we already discussed, or the number of homes permitted in that triangle. We designed this project to have limited homes in that protective triangle, and that's where we are proposing some open storage, which is a permitted use in the mixed use zoning. Interesting to note, like the city of Lebanon, the city of Albany does not restrict residential development in their airport transition zone. They limit density and height like you do. Our engineer, Brian Vendetta of Udell Engineering, who's very familiar with Lebanon, the airport, and the regulations, calculated the height as required by the FAA in that most critical runway protection zone. The maximum height allowed for any structure would be 74 feet tall. That 74 foot limit is about twice as high as any structure we intend to build. Anything in that proposed open storage would be substantially shorter than that. So we are confident that we can, and will comply. Moreover, we have no conflict with the airport, the airport community, or the Pilots Association. We are open to similar restriction or easement or disclosure for residents, much like the racetrack, that informs them and precludes them from interfering with the airport's ongoing operations. We are proposing to bring entry-level homes, starter homes, move-down homes, much-needed housing, together with some nicely related and supportive commercial services for this new neighborhood and the community of Lebanon. We respectfully ask that you approve our comp plan amendment and zone change application this evening. With that, I'd like to know if you have any questions. We'd be happy to address them.

Yeah, Matt, I have a quick question here. On the green, purple, and the blue zones that you showed on the map up there, there's obviously three different height restrictions for each zone. Is that what you're saying? With the blue zone having a 74-foot.

Actually, it kind of comes down. So if you go to the back, the next slide, that might help you. So planes are going to come in at an angle, right? So the closer you get to the airport, the less you can do. Does that make sense?

So the height restriction in the

These colors represent density restrictions, so how many dwellings you can put within per acre is how the calculation is. Not height. Not height. This restricts development nearly completely. These represent limited, that one unit per acre, two units per acre, and then four units per acre. How height is regulated is that you have to measure where your elevation is along the ground level here. proximity to this imaginary surface which is a slope measurement when in this case airplanes are approaching and coming into land so in the zone closest to the end of the runway how high can a building be that would be right in here which is outside the lowest

far end of that apex the closest to the runway is 74 feet that's the tallest dwelling that we could build we don't propose to do that that makes sense if you go to the end of this slope and our northern property line the tallest building that we could legally build by their regulations is 74 feet

Basically, if I'm reading this correctly, that approach coming in from boundary to boundary would be, well, they have it on here as 462 in elevation down to 413 in elevation. Now, is that feet above the ground? They have a acronym on there of MSL, which I don't know what that means, so I would have to look that up. That's the glide path for that aircraft coming in. They're going to be in that proximity of 400 to 450 feet to come in on a glide path over that zone is how I interpret it. If I'm crazy, someone tell me. That's what it looks like.

So 350-ish feet would be the closest it would be to any building that you're going to build.

roughly yeah let's bring brian up i'm going to explain this better north property line and you subtract the ground height which is roughly 350 feet that is your limitation and what that adds up kind of limited it by saying that you're correct um is there a motion to approve

the amendments as read.

I'll fix my error. I moved to approve the amendment as read.

I'll fix my second. And I apologize for maybe I'm being slow. Are you guys talking about the amendment to the title of the bill itself by identifying the tax slots? Because I don't think we need to do that.

I think he's amending the comprehensive plan to change the zoning of those. With the conditions that were noted in that.

Right. And all of those are already in there as part of the ordinance. So that's what I'm saying is instead of in any way limiting what the ordinance does, maybe we could just move to approve ordinance number six, ordinance number 3048.

Move for approval.

Second. OK. What a hill.

motion made to approve it's been seconded is that is that satisfied okay all in favor all opposed motion passes okay okay we'll move on to regular session uh thank you so much yes

which I didn't get a chance to read, it mentions the comp plan amendment and the zone map amendment, both, which was the confusion earlier. Okay, cool. That's why I did that. Just wanted to clarify that. All right, thank you.

All righty, thank you so much. I'll move on to regular session approval to award 12th Street extension and realignment contract project 26702, city manager.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and City Council. What we have before you here tonight is an engineering design contract with Udall Engineering. It is for what was just approved, the zone map and comp map amendments and part of the Emerald Crossing. The development requires, as you heard, several transportation system improvements. Those include the 12th Street extension, Airway Road extension, Walker Road extension, and a new traffic signal at Airport Road and 12th Street. This is very unique to have one development that's got this many, I'll call them big streets. They're all part of our transportation system plan and they're also all included in our transportation system development plan. They're all, those streets that I just mentioned, they're all eligible for either transportation system development charge funding or credits. As we met with the concerts throughout this process in UDL Engineering, we determined that the best approach to this would be for the city to construct 12th Street. It gets a little weird if we try to mix developer and city money. So we tried to pair off what we thought was more of a regional project, the 12th and airport intersection for a traffic signal, which will include some additional sidewalks. to tie into Stoltz Hill Road and then obviously the extension into Stoltz Hill Road. One of the things that is unique also about this project is the closure or dead end of Stoltz Hill Road at Wassam Street. If you look at the angle, which I believe there's a picture in the packet, It's extremely difficult to tie all those streets together in any way, shape, or form. So what you've got proposed in front of you there is a closure of Stoltz Hill there at Wassam Street. 12th Street then ties into Stoltz Hill Road, and that becomes the predominant route through the area. Mostly With that, there's probably not much more to discuss. We are working with the county on a road transfer agreement in which the city would take jurisdiction of Stoltz Hill Road, remaining from Wassam Street to Stoltz Hill Road. We're working through some agreements there with them. And with that, we're recommending that council approve the $418,000 contract with Udall Engineering. Happy to answer any questions.

No questions. So is there a motion. Most it's been paid to prove second okay. Most been made to prove it's been second all in favor aye all opposed. Most passes. All righty, we'll move on to addition. The next agenda item on regular session is Additions to Grant and Sherman Full Street and Utility Reconstruction Program 25705. City Manager.

Thank you again, Mr. Mayor. This is, obviously we're working on Grant Street in the downtown, if anybody's been downtown. We've got it pretty well tore up. When we originally scoped the project, we started doing cost estimates and were afraid that we weren't going to have enough to do a little bit to everything instead of a lot to a little bit. So we left out a lot of things, left out curb and gutter, did some street reconstruction, but left the curb and gutter and sidewalk out in areas. When we got our bid prices in June, I think mid valley gravel was two point eight four million for that and that which included Sherman street. We had budgeted and have appropriated three point three million for the project. And what we're looking to do tonight is add back sidewalks throughout the core of the downtown on grant street. So basically from. It would be from Park Street all the way to 3rd Street, get sidewalk curb and gutter put back in there. We've also got some additional sanitary sewer and some cross-connection, when I say cross-connection, storm drainage and sanitary work that we're doing. We feel that we have plenty of funds to do that. It's a total of about $360,000 in changes to this, and most of it's bid on work. So there's no actual change order price to the contractor. I just always like to let the council know and have them be the final decision on the additional expenditure above and beyond what the original contract amount was. So what we're asking here tonight is for a motion on an additional $360,000 to clean that up and make it look really good. So I can be happy to answer any questions on that.

No questions? Alrighty. Is there a motion?

Move for approval.

Second. Motion has been made to approve the additions. It's been seconded. All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Motion passes. Move on to consensus for potential surplus property discussions, consensus only. So city manager.

Thanks again, Mr. Mayor. So as you're aware, or at least from my staff reports, you know that we've been looking at all of the city properties that we actually own. trying to determine which, if any of them, no longer serve a public purpose. There's not a lot. There wasn't as many as I thought. There's a few little pieces here and there, but one has come to mind, and there are some parcels on the other side of the South Santiam River, and I think I've got some maps that were in the packet. The first map shows the existing configuration of tax loss that the city owns. The red outline on that are they're all separate tax slots. The second map in there shows what we would propose to do if the city if there's consensus to move forward and we would combine those tax slots and do some property line adjustments to where we would get rid of or surplus the property on the other side of the river from from the city limit side this is all located within the county and it's all i believe it's outside our urban growth boundary as well so it's property we own and we feel that there's no reason to keep this however i didn't want to go and hire an appraisal hire a surveyor and go through all the lot line adjustments and tax lot changes if there wasn't at least a consensus to move forward on that because this is gonna cause, and we did budget some funds for this to do it because we knew it was coming, but wanted to make sure that the council was on board with that before we spent the money to change the tax lots actually and go forward with that. Happy to answer any questions. I'm just kind of looking for a consensus, and we would bring this back, obviously, at a later date. This is not an actual surplusing of the property tonight. There's a statute that requires us to go through a process, and then we would bring that back at a later date. So with that, I'm just looking for a consensus, questions, whatever you guys got.

This is just redrawing the lot lines?

Yeah, redrawing and combining. And there's several property owners that have got, and I'm not 100% sure that we'll combine them at this point. We might, I know we'll combine the two bottom ones, but we could sell them separate. I think that's something that I'll work out with Surveyor and Jason and I'll decide what the best approach to that is, but likely would be to combine it and sell it as one piece just to... It's lowlands. It's got some wetlands in it, riparian zone. It's wooded. We just really don't have any use for it, unless we want to build more parks.

Yeah, that's what I was about to ask, is what usefulness does this land have?

I've actually had people reach out and want to buy it. Really? For what purpose? They just want to add it to their inventory.

I guess just add some buffer to there.

Probably want the homeless off of it so they stop trying to catch it on fire.

Across the river, we'll see what's going on. On that subject, we are working with a couple of the property owners to build an actual road in there to access this property and hopefully have an easement into it. We've been working with the fire department and also our police department so that we've got a little better access into that area.

So from what you're telling me is if you go through all this effort, there are buyers for this land potentially.

Yeah, I mean, I can't guarantee that, but...

But it's likely.

Yeah, I would think it would be likely. I have one in particular that's... asked multiple times okay and it serves no purpose to us usually and and typically what you would do is you we in this case i think we'd recommend that you go through the surplusing property and then direct staff to to take it to accept bids on it and we'll have an appraisal on what its value is and we can accept those bids and look at them and say well this is worth it or this isn't worth it so But before I spend that $25,000 on putting all this together, it's going to be at least that.

The water treatment plant on the river down south, there's no reason to ever hold on to this property for any utility reason.

No. So this property was all... We've sold off a lot of those parcels over there. This property was all purchased back in... Oh man, probably 2000s, early 2000s. There was a proposal done to take our outfall for our wastewater plant and to pipe it under the river and let it overland flow through here in a cooling process. And I think that proposal fell flat because it wasn't a guarantee. It smelled a lot like what Talking Water Gardens is today.

Oh, OK.

Anyway, so we didn't do that. So that's what the that's what the property was purchased for. And it was meant to be a bunch of trails and walking paths and, and so on. But I would contend that we don't have enough parks money to maintain more.

I just wanted to make sure it wasn't something that years down, years, years, years down the road we could use for infrastructure in some way.

We've got an absolute ton of property on the wastewater plant proper as itself, and we would keep everything on the river towards Tennessee. So we have more than enough room to, and we've got all that on the other side as well to build that.

Just asking the question. Perfect. Sounds good to me.

Okay. I do wonder if 50 years, 60 years down the road, if they're, You know, we're talking about funding now for parks and everything, and there's clearly no funding now to build any new parks. But to give away that type of green space, I don't know if it's swamp. You know, I haven't walked the property, so I don't know if it's actually would be usable to have you know, in 100 years for future people in Lebanon to be walking around in there on trails and have open space, or if it's just too swampy and not everywhere?

I think there's a valid point to be made that you could build trails and whatnot back there. Again, you're outside your urban growth boundary, so it's county property. We bought it for the intensive purposes for doing that wastewater project. When I say we, I didn't buy that.

And there's always a liability and cost of owning any property.

Yeah. When did we purchase the property again? It's early 2000s. I'd have to go back and look.

So it's been roughly 25 years? Yeah. So, okay.

And we got rid of a lot of it back in there.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, doesn't a man-made dike protect a lot of that property?

Yes. Okay. It goes up if I remember right in there, but it does flood during certain times of year.

Piggybacking on Jeremy's question here, before it got sold off, would there be any advantage to having some kind of easement included for the purpose of trails or something like that?

uh you could i mean we could do that i mean we could always retain an easement um i guess the the question we don't own all of it how do you get there right so then you're buying more property to get to this property in order to have a way to to utilize it so we would have to buy property closer to the grant street bridge and and in order to have an easement there to to access this property i have to think that it would hinder somebody who wants to buy it as well if it was me it would hinder it for me yes

So you're looking for a consensus. I will just say that I'd be okay with the changes.

We'll start the process. It's going to take a while to go through all this.

Do we have a consensus? Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Good.

Okay. We'll move on to the next item on our agenda, Resolution 2026-18, Finance Director.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. Before you is a resolution looking at our annual fee schedule. We are a little bit behind in getting this in front of you, but there aren't many changes either. What we focused on a lot with the fee schedule changes this round I was just trying to open up some public records issues. There were a lot of things that, as we were going through the fee schedule, we deemed fit more of the public records mentality, trying to be open and transparent with those records. And so a lot of what you see in the fee schedule changes is trying to open that up and actually remove some fees that maybe we would have charged for previously. Then there are some other changes related to you. Things like if we have to buy a flash drive in order to give you records, we're going to charge you whatever we pay for that flash drive to recoup those costs. Some of that wasn't necessarily spelled out. At the beginning of the fee schedule, you'll see, and there's two different views in this. If you look at page 175 of the council packet, if you have the whole thing in front of you, the exhibit A shows the type of fee in one column, the current fee in the second column, and then what it's been updated to, and anything that is red would indicate that it has a change associated with it. So you'll see most of them are just little minor tweaks. And then you get down into the police department fees. And this is where you can really see that some of our stuff has kind of been amended in order to, again, provide kind of that open public records feel and make sure that folks are getting the information that they rightly have access to. And some of this stuff is easy for us to pull. So for example, one of the things we were doing was charging kind of, I think it was a $10 non-refundable fee for research when maybe it took us two minutes. That kind of stuff we kind of think isn't really helpful to the public, is not very open and transparent. So we really wanted to try to tackle some of those things. So everything in here that has changed is centered around public records, mostly in the admin fees, particularly with the city recorder's office and then the police department. Otherwise, everything else is remaining the same. I can try to answer any questions you might have, but may also punt to various other professionals in the public records realm if there's specific questions.

I'm just not going to burn CDs anymore. It's so sad. It's like a death of an era.

I just got used to not having cassette tapes. You know, it's really kind of funny. I stuck a DVD in a DVD player yesterday, and I thought, man, I don't know that I remembered these exist anymore.

Is there any other questions? Do you have comments?

No, I'm getting ready to read.

Oh, okay. If there's no questions, city attorney, please read the title of the resolution.

Resolution number 2026-18, a resolution amending fees and charges for city services and repealing exhibit A fee schedules of resolution number 2025-05. Is there a motion?

Moved for approval.

Second.

You okay? Okay. Motion was made to approve the resolution. It's been seconded. All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed? Motion passes.

Thank you, Council.

Department reports. City Manager.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and City Council. I don't have too much to report on. Always happy to answer any questions. The one burning item probably is our November meeting is scheduled on November 11th, which is Veterans Day. And I was wondering if you might want to change that from November 11th. We could do November 4th. Cancel that meeting and hold a special, what would be called in code, a special meeting for November 4th. And then just cancel the November 11th meeting. But I'll leave that up to you all to discuss and let me know what you want. I'm okay if that turns out that way myself.

Likewise. Yeah, that's fine.

Okay. Julie, we'll move, we'll cancel the 11th and... Dominic, you good? Yes. Jeremy? Okay. We'll move that to the fourth. Other than that, I don't really have much more. You're good, too? Oh, that's important. I'm sorry.

I wanted to make sure of that.

Frank, are you good? Okay. All right. November 4th.

Just wait. Just wait.

Fourth it is. Yeah. Other than that, I have nothing else.

All righty. Is there any items from council? No? Okay. Any press or public comments? Mr. Mayor, I do have a comment.

Please. I've already done a little bit of the research on the reefer trucks or trailers that kind of at the beginning, public comments. And I've sent a proposal to both Ron and Frank. I don't think Ron's had a chance to read it yet. No, I have not.

I saw it come through on my phone.

There are actually some cities, specifically Newport, that have regulations dealing specifically with that situation. So I stole from it and sent them a proposal to potentially amend our ordinance. It would be amending the noise ordinance and setting forth a specific prohibition. I assume that given the comments of the council, that is something that the council would like to be brought forward.

I'm in favor of that. I want to make sure that, because we've referred to the buzz twice, that was a big deal on the buzz. I know who that was because he got into it with somebody and the other guy said, hey, if you unplug my compressor, you're going to ruin my stuff. It's going to cost you money because the ordinance right now handled that. I don't know if it's a giant issue. I don't know what it's going to cost to the trucker.

actually, I went over there and I, I actually was actually unbelievable because his neighbor couldn't come tonight. So I just says, Brian, let me come over. So I went over there and I listened, you can actually feel it come through the house. And it's like, it's bizarre. It really is bizarre. And I'm like, okay, this is pretty serious.

It would be annoying for sure. I used to own trucks. And sometimes some of our hauling would require us to stay in truck stops. And you never wanted to park next to a reefer. That's what Dave was saying. Ever. Because it was just a vibe.

Well, in the industry, the industry recommendations are never to have those parked in the vicinity of a residential neighborhood.

So I will do that. So you will update that and we can bring that back in September. Oh man.

Building new houses where a racetrack is.

So next, uh, scheduled council meeting September 9th, 2026. And we are going to adjourn the regular session and move into an executive session and we'll reconvene at, uh, seven 40. So adjourn a record. All righty, we'll move back, like I said, we're moving back to the regular session. We'll be talking about the Association of Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Contract, City Manager.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As you're aware, management staff and members of the AFSCME Union have been negotiating the next three-year collective bargaining agreement on, I believe, Angela, what was the date that they, July 30th, they ratified the contract on their end. We're here tonight to recommend that City Council also ratify the contract and approve the contract with the changes that were made. Some of those big changes, I'm not going to go through all of them, but compensation, CPI-W wage adjustments are set at 3% to 5% for July 26, July 27, and July 28. If the applicable CPI-W is 6% or higher, employees receive an additional 1% wage adjustment. Uh, the salary structure has changed the parties, both the city and they asked me union agreed to move to a 16 grade salary structure with 5% between grades. Um, also included in that is classification restructure and market review of all employees positions. and that'll become effective January 1st of 2027. Some of the other big things, the maximum accumulation of sick time is reduced from 1,160 hours to 960 hours with transition protections for employees already above the new cap and separate treatment for tier one, tier two employees. Retirement work back, a new provision establishes vacation accrual, salary placement, and sick leave treatment for employees who retire from PERS and return to the same classification. There was several other small things. We did get drug and alcohol testing in on 25% of our, not to exceed 25% of the pool of our safety sensitive folks, so that's new. And then the term of the agreement would run from July 1st, 2026 through June 30th of 2029. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions, but we are recommending approval of the new CBA collective bargaining agreement from that term. So happy to answer any questions.

The only question I would have is do you need these back?

Yes.

Okay. All righty, if there's no questions, is there a motion on this matter?

Move for approval. Second.

Motion was made to approve the contract. It's been seconded, all in favor?

Aye.

All opposed? Motion passes. And with that, this meeting is adjourned at