City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening everybody. Thanks for coming to your city council meeting for January 12, 2026. I'll call us to order. First, we're going to remember to turn off our cell phones. Then, as is our custom, I acknowledge that the land on which the city of Hood River sits is the ancestral home of indigenous peoples. This includes the Neespur, Umatillaa, Warm Springs, Yaka, and other tribes who stewarded this land for generations. We recognize the lasting impact of colonialism and commit to working together for a more just and sustainable future. Please join me and rise and say the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. We have a couple of shifts around in the agenda. I understand that the bridge authority is not coming. Is that correct, Abigail? Yes, mayor. That is correct.

We do have a distinguished guest. We recently got a new state senator who I think is on Zoom. Thank you for being with us, Senator Drezen. We'd love to hear from you. Uh thank you for having me and it's a pleasure to be here with you. I look forward to my opportunity to be in person instead of Zoom. We have legislative days uh pretty early tomorrow morning and so thank you for accommodating uh that schedule. I wanted to just share a few uh brief words about myself and then I have a very very succinct presentation on what's coming up in the short February session. I'm hoping that um folks will use that opportunity to communicate with my office and so it gives important dates and deadlines and of course contact information for me. Um I'll just briefly say I am a native Oregonian and I'm originally from the southern part of this state. I was born in Clamoth Falls and I have served in the legislature. I got elected for the first time to the house in 2018 and um and then I ran for governor in 2022. Uh ran for my house seat again in 2024 and uh had the privilege and opportunity to uh apply to be appointed to the Senate district after um Senator Bon made the decision to resign prior to the completion of his term. I believe in public service. I believe that public policy can benefit all people and that is the goal of my work is to ensure that um that government does its best to serve the needs of people and that it is not a barrier to people pursuing their own future and their best and brightest um hopes and dreams. And so, um, with that, if it's okay with you guys, I would love to share my screen and, uh, run very

quickly through a brief PowerPoint on the legislative session. Thank you. Do we have is the check in the right place, Abigail, for this to help? Someone tell me when you're ready because now I just see my PowerPoint. Yes. Uh, the senator will be sharing her PowerPoint. I do I I I do not see the share screen yet. I will let you know. Uh oh. Does that require anything on my end, people? Yes, senator. I think if you can share your screen. Got it. Thank you. I'll actually my part here. Sorry about that. Right. Tech tech. Yes, things are happening now. All right. Thank you for that.

I And now we see the presentation now.

Thank you so much. Um, so that is me. Um, so let's talk a little bit about the short legislative session. It really is a sprint, not a marathon. It begins on February the 2nd and it will conclude by March the 9th. I anticipate that this legislative session will be marked by extensive conversations about the budget. So I would anticipate the um ways and means committee which is of course the budget committee for the legislature will discuss cuts up to 500 million in the upcoming session. Um that might include discussions of various reserve funds which the state has. Um the state has significant reserve funds in the rainy day fund which is statutory and the education stability fund uh which is constitutional. Both funds have the same triggers for how to access the funds and those triggers all have to be in place to be able to access those funds. Um the state has not had an e has not had um job numbers and economic impacts which would which would automatically make those funds available to us to rebalance the budget. Currently the state budget is slightly out of balance but on the rainy day fund side at least um it is a statutory fund and it can be accessed sort of by bypassing um some of those triggers with a simple majority vote. Um so there is a lot of budget conversation. We're also going to see that because the gas tax was uh successfully uh referred to the ballot. that conversation, the governor's indicated that she would like to repeal the entire bill from the long session uh which was House Bill uh 30 or I'm sorry, the special session and that was House Bill uh 3991. Uh that'll that'll take up a lot of conversation whether or not that's a full repeal or a partial repeal or what to do about the transportation budget

itself. So that'll be a focus. So that's again another money issue. I would anticipate there'll also be conversations about capital construction projects. For the first time, legislators are limited not only to two bills. So, we're limited to requesting two bills. We can support however many bills as we choose, but we can only request two bills. And I'll talk in a few minutes about the two bills that I'm requesting. But we can also only request two capital construction items in the short session. That's a brand new requirement. And so when we talk about the meetings that I have had uh for the needs at the county level and what the county needs right now for a courthouse or the needs that uh that Moer has brought forward um you can only have two requests. So while the Senate district has covers a huge square a lot a lot of miles and a lot of people in this short session we can only make two capital construction requests. And so that'll require coordinate coordination among the House members and the Senate member for any given legislative seat. we will be doing that. Um, so I just wanted to kind of give that big sort of broad overview. There's a there's going to be a lot of conversation on the policy side. Committees can also bring bills forward and we will also likely see a bill to address liability reforms that are just a huge issue in the Senate district uh when it comes to access to the mountain and whether or not our ski resorts can stay viable business opportunities. So just kind of an overview of what I anticipate for the for the legislative session. The short session was originally created to fix uh laws that needed to be reformed from the long session to adjust budgets. Like I said, we are slightly out of balance. We balance our budget once every two years. That's a banial budget. And so because of that, we routinely go kind of in and out of balance over the course of those two years. We're required to be at balance by the close of the bienium. And so we have time, but I will anticipate that we will see some budget rebalance happening in the short session. Um I just this is the calendar. The reason I

bring this up is because you can see one week after the session convenes the original chamber uh I in the Senate for example will have to post work sessions for any bills that they intend to move out of their original committees one weekend. So by the 9th of February those bills will have have to be posted and then you will also have the work session will actually have to be um complete by the 20th in your next chamber. So you can see the first chamber deadline is two weeks into session. You have your second chamber deadline um into that into that fourth week into session and it goes really really quick. And so then of course we have the close of session by the 8th. So we will anticipate being on the floor by that second week in session every single day for long days. If constituents want to come in, please come into the capital. We'll have floor every day. I'd love to welcome you to um to the floor and I' I'd love to um provide a tour and make sure that you have the opportunity to see your government at work. Um we also have my two bills that I will be um that I've requested for this legislative session. The first bill relates to harm reduction. Um I've had communities across the state have concerns about the distribution of drug paraphernalia specific to school zones. And so this is legislation which would create a buffer zone around schools and um that would prohibit the distribution of drug paraphernelia uh through harm reduction nonprofits activities around school zones. And it also enforces um the opportunity for individuals to have the right to sue a private right of action for those who leave behind biohazards specifically the people that don't do needle exchanges but just allow for those biohazards to remain at the point of the needle exchange. Uh the second bill that I have requested uh for this legislative session is education reform. I've heard from lots of teachers that have real concerns about safety in the

classroom. Uh this legislation does a couple of things. It requires by third grade that kids have the opportunity to show proficiency in reading. They wouldn't be able to be socially promoted at third grade. they would have access to additional interventions to support their opportunity um to become proficient including including summer school and additional um opportunities for t for tutoring and supports. Um it also gives teachers the opportunity to have more authority in their classroom and and potentially remove disrupted students. And the last thing that it would do would be to uh restore the essential learning requirements for high school graduation. Um I also want to flag a few other issues. I think I mentioned liability reform. That's that's really been brought to us by the ski industry. Um, but it really does impact river rafting. Anything where you would where you would sign a waiver as an adult um that would say I'm going to engage in an activity that I know has inherent risk. Um, Oregon's courts um um we are we are the only state where those waiverss are not currently being honored. It's impacted insurance. It's impacted costs and all those kinds of things. And so this is an effort to do a course correction um to to set that standard back to before the case was decided. It's called the Bagley case. And the next thing that um that I'll be supporting is a rebate for first-time home buyers. I'm really excited about this program. It would help it would help uh offset some of the closing costs for first-time home buyers specifically. And then the last thing is um is a hard push for the federal tax relief to be extended for w for wildfire victims. And that again as you you know seeing that it's a federal issue is uh being presented as a joint memorial. And this is the the most important this is the most important part of the presentation. Um this is my contact information. You can reach me uh directly in my office. You can come and see me inside the state capital. And of course please email me

at any time. Um I want I'm here to be a resource. I am here to represent uh the needs of the Senate District and this community and I'm here to be an advocate for you and I can do and I can do that job to the best of my abilities if you communicate with me and if you share with me what your concerns are and in particular as you see legislation following along through the process, please let me know. I track uh constituent comments very very closely and in that in this role I really believe that um I'm serving as a representative of the people and that I work really hard uh to track constituent engagement and constituent comments and make sure that that how I engage on these legislative issues uh reflects the people that I've been sent there to serve. So, I want to thank you guys for the time today and and I look forward to working with you guys in the upcoming legislation legislative session, excuse me, and throughout the remainder of this year.

Thank you, Senator. Any comments or questions, council, for our senator, our state senator

Thank you, Senator, for being here. Appreciate your time. I do have three questions for you. Given that there is challenges with some of the federal policy that we know is having impact on local governments, how do you see the legislaturator's responsibility in ensuring due process and constitutional protections that are constitutionally upheld, especially when enforcement authority or emergency powers are exercised so that local governments are not left navigating legal gray areas? So I appreciate that uh question and I would I would just say that the various branches of government all serve their own critical and important role. I routinely hear from local governments who believe that home rules being ignored and run over and that they are being asked to do things that the state is mandating on them or dictating to them and it may or may not reflect their own community values. They may or may not even have funds to be able to meet those duties and obligations. And so while we have we're having a lot of conversations right now at the federal level and the state level um as a state legislator I am routinely put in the position of standing in the gap on behalf of local governments as well and doing my best to make sure that those voices are heard and respected. Um I absolutely uh believe in upholding the constitution. That is an oath of office that I take at the beginning of every legislative session and do my absolute best to abide by by that oath in every circumstance. Thank you. Appreciate that. You did mention earlier that public policy can benefit all people. My next question is given the constraints and you might not be able to answer this right now given that you've already introduced the two bills that you will be pushing forward in this short session but given the constraints of measures five and 50 what specific reforms are you or your peers talking about or considering to modernize local revenue while

maintaining taxpayer protections?

I think that's such an important issue right now. Um, we have seen the state budget just explode. It has doubled in about 8 to 10 years. Um, Oregon's population is about 4.2 million people and holding steady. We're not seeing the growth that we've seen in the past. And at the same time, our our budgets have grown exponentially. And so, uh, conversations around how do we keep up with rising costs while balancing that with the reality that, um, families are also being pinched right now. I know when, uh, we were having conversations about the courthouse and and touring through the community, it was really clear that property taxes and and cost constraints make it hard for your for workforce to actually live and work in Hood River. And so figuring out how to balance out the need to provide public services and maintain that that critical role that government performs and not cost burden our shared constituents is really really important. Those are conversations that happen in every legislative session. And I would say the difference between having conversations about it and seeing reforms and seeing change, it ends up coming really from the ground up. I I see, you know, for years and years and years, Oregon has had I I don't even know how many times we've seen a sales tax go down in flames at the ballot box in our state just again and again and again. And and the thing about this gas tax that has been referred and had 250,000 signatures from Oregonians that reminds me and tells me something that's really important that Oregonians themselves at the end of the day are the ones that have to pay these taxes. And if we're going to reform these systems, we need to be able to do it in a way that they are partners in it and and it's not just being imposed on them.

We're not just saying we know best, we know better. You know, such and such or so and so just needs more money and so you'll have to pay more. We need to figure out a way for buyin. It needs to be a shared conversation about how we move forward into the future. Uh we can't just blindly grow government if people don't see value, if people don't actually see the results of their investment. Um that's a problem. I I think that if people rec if people see what they're getting for their taxpayer dollars, they're willing to increase local bond, they're willing to support their local school, they're willing to support their local fire station, but if they don't see a return on that, if they don't believe that money is going to be spent wisely and they also can't afford it, we see those things go down in flames. So, it's really got to be a shared responsibility and a shared conversation with people that are elected to serve and ensure that government is fulfilling its its responsibility, but it needs to be a restrained government that has a partnership with the people. So, I think reform comes from the ground up. I think reform starts with Oregonians themselves saying, you know, what exactly is it that you want out of your government and and how are we going to how are we going to pay for that?

Thank you. Thank you. I really appreciate your comments. My my third question is around revenue reformation and ensuring that you are hearing from constituents. So, I I know that you came and and toured the gorge, but what are ways and how would that process work for constituents to inform, you know, those that are within the state legislature around how they're most impacted by this policies to be able to have better reformation and as you mentioned, so that it is a partnership and you're hearing from the people that are most impacted by policy.

Email, call, set up a meeting. I I do meetings, meetings, meetings, meetings, meetings, meetings, meetings. And also just process-wise, just to give a little glimpse into how I organize the feedback that I get through any form. If you call my office, it's it's it's maintained and recorded in files. If you email me, we maintain that. So all of that information, if it's specific to a bill, it goes into the bill file. And when that bill comes up for a floor on for a vote on the floor or in committee, I look I look into that bill file, it's an electronic bill file, and I can see exactly who in the community shared their concerns, their thoughts, their impact, their input on that piece of legislation. If it's a general issue set, um we also maintain those records by topic. So I would say input from the community gets um it absolutely makes a difference because we track it. I track it and and it matters to me when people communicate. And so I would say for people that that say I you know my voice isn't heard all the you know if anybody feels that way I can tell you for me personally and also for the people that I work with in Salem um constituent voices really do matter. I mean, there's a lot of people that engage and there's a lot of people that engage with people that may or may not directly represent them, but for me personally, I take I take very seriously um that I have a duty and an obligation to my constituents that is unique to my to my duty and obligation broadly to the state because there there is a duty to both. There's a duty to balance out the needs of the state as a whole and then there's a duty to hear the voices and be responsive to my constituents.

Thank you, Senator. you're making these comments and I know you can't see, but there is a a room full of your constituents here. And so I think it's also important for them to hear that your voice truly does matter and now you all have ways on how you can get connected with Senator Drezen to ensure that your voice uh is being addressed. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Other comments or questions from council? Thanks again, Senator.

Thank you so much for having me. I recommend that we move the action items towards the bottom of the agenda regarding the ICE raids up to the next agenda item, but this is our council. So, do do four of us object to that? Nope, we're going. Okay, we're doing that. So, there are two resolutions prepared for us tonight. Um, every every person on the public comment sign up is is wishing to address this issue. Again, I'm going to suggest that we hear an update from staff about what has happened since our last meeting prior to public comment. Is that does it please the council? Okay, Abigail.

Super. Thank you uh all for that. And uh thank you everyone for being here today. Again, I'm Abigail Elder. I'm your city manager. I have a short presentation and I just need a second to bring it up. Excellent. Great. Thank you. So, uh, the last meeting, gosh, I we haven't been in session since last year. It's been so long. Uh, on December 8th, 2025, uh, you met and reviewed Let's get this the right spot. um you reviewed a lot of different options to address the impacts of immigration enforcement in our community. Uh you gave me a clear direction on a couple items, so I just wanted to give you a report back on those items. So again, a reminder that Oregon is a sanctuary state. So a lot of what we do is already covered by that state umbrella. Uh that is our san we call it sanctuary promise law. uh that prohibits uh state and local police and government uh from enforcing federal immigration laws. And we've talked in detail about what that looks like. So, I heard four actions from you, one, two, three, four, five actions from you uh back in December. Um so, I'm going to just run through each one with a quick status update and happy to take questions. The first was to direct the city manager, that's me, to declare an emergency. So, that was done on December 12th. Um we tried to share that widely. We shared that with the press. It's uh on a bulletin board outside. Uh a emergency is a really temporary measure. Um it per our charter, I have the ability to declare the emergency, but you need to affirm that. So that's one of the actions that's in your uh packet tonight. And then should you choose to extend the emergency for another 30 days, so like until your next um to your February meeting, um you would need to take that action as well. So that's in

your packet if you want to consider that tonight. Um, you also asked that we put signage in our building. So, you will see that we have uh signs. We always had some signs, but we've made it more clear what areas are public and not public. So, if you remember, immigration enforcement agents can um enter the same public spaces that the general public can, but they cannot uh be in our employee areas um or the areas that are not available to the public. So, we've made that really clear in our buildings. Third, you asked for training for staff. In tonight's packet, you have a staff policy um of how we will address um requests for information or access from an immigration enforcement agent. Um that has been reviewed by our union leaderships. Remember, we have three unions and once it gets signed off today, we will schedule um actual meeting with um all of our staff. So, generally our frontline staff will not be asked to um make a determination whether a request is valid or not. uh that will be our department heads, myself and the city attorney. Uh then you ask for opportunities to learn from the community. Um so this is part of having an emergency declaration allows me to spend some budget dollars that were not in the original budget. Um I have met with the next door. They provided me with a scope of work uh for four listening sessions and one town hall. So, um that would give us an opportunity to hear from particular groups or um you know the listening sessions would not be public meetings so people could be more candid. Uh and then a town hall that uh could be a more public meeting and really could be an opportunity for you to hear from um all aspects of our community. Uh and then finally, you asked for um for us to draft a sanctuary city resolution for your consideration. Uh so that is in your packet. Um, again, just as a reminder, a sanctuary city resolution is an administrative action. It's not an ordinance or a law. Um, it's a formal statement. Um, and it does not

have an enforcement component to it. So, just wanted to let you be aware of that. Um, those are my updates. So, really kind of three actions for you your consideration tonight. Affirm the emergency from last month. Uh, choose to extend an emergency going forward. And then we if you wish to adopt a sanctuary city resolution. That's it. Thank Thank you, Abigail.

What I wish is that I knew where we seven were at on passing these resolutions. It seems to me to be useful if we can to and maybe again I'm I'm I'm asking I'm not telling if we could give an indication of whether we intend to pass these resolutions I would think that could inform what folks choose to tell us or we want to hear from folks and then have our discussion about the resolutions. I do not think we should vote before hearing testimony, but I was wondering if we wanted if you all wanted to have some discussion among ourselves prior to hearing testimony. And that's about as far as I could think it through. Glattus, and then Ben.

Thank you, Mayor. I think to me it's okay that we have a discussion around an emergency declaration because there are specific timeline pieces that I would like to better understand around the listening sessions. I had also asked Abigail during our check-in, can we extend the emergency declaration for more than 30 days and would also like for us to have a discussion around what how are we measuring success for staff training? Is it total number of staff? Is it department that have been trained? So I I would like to have a discussion around that. And then I'm not ready to vote on sanctuary city quite at this today. Would love an opportunity to hear from our community. But I also think that as we were just discussing with the senator, it's so important that we are listening to what community members have to say, those people who are most impacted by our policies. and that after that is when we should bring the sanctuary city discussion back to our agenda.

Thank you, Ben. Um, for the purposes of letting people get home early if they want to, um, I'd rather hear from the audience first and then go into our deliberations, but I'm not married to that. If other counselors feel different, I'll support a different decision. Thank you, Ben. Doug,

I just wanted to affirm uh the the points that um uh that Glattus just brought up. Um you know, um I think it's particularly important for the resolution not to necessarily go forward without lots of input. I think we'll get input on that tonight, which I think is important, but also I I'm encouraged to see that the emergency declaration was allowed Abigail to work with the next door. Um, so I'm in favor of of what Glattus said regarding, you know, extending that to be able to do that type of work. And she might not not have to use it all the time, but I think that was a really good use of that uh that strategy. Uh, but I'd like to hear from the listening sessions for the people that are, you know, most affected by this type of situation that can't be with us here tonight out of fear of leaving the house to just sort of understand what their take on the resolution is. Um, certainly don't want it to seem overly performative or virtue signaling needed to mean something. So I want to hear from as many people as possible. So I have the same opinion about that.

Thank you.

Great. Sure. Um I don't have any problem with taking action on the EO the executive order. Um and I would rather hear from folks before making any further decisions. So agreeing with councilors to

I support that as well. That was very clear. Thank you. For for me, my focus at the last city council was to figure out a way to stop the raids. I now realize that a sanctuary city uh resolution could also be a comfort to folks like sort of like on the way to the to the detention knowing knowing that that uh folks stand with them. I was very impressed with some conversations I had this this past month. So um in that case again stop me if I'm driving too fast. Abigail, you have that book. Go ahead.

Yes. If you just take a moment, I just if I can just check in with the audience one more time. Uh if anyone wants to sign up to speak, I know some folks came later. You want to sign up to speak? Uh please sign this p piece of paper. I will give it to the mayor. The mayor will call on you and you will have three minutes. And I have a very obnoxious timer that will go off when it's three minutes. So, I'm going to set this here and then I'll bring it up to you if anyone else signs up. Great. Thanks. Thank you. Councilors, would you like to uh take action on the emergency declaration ratification and extension before or after the testimony? Doug, I'm in favor of it now. I think it's a useful tool.

You want to make a motion? Um, if I can find the motion. Yeah. Sorry, I didn't mean to. 79. Yeah. Um, I also want to make the motion in mind uh that well I guess I guess Abigail what what language would you need to extend it for beyond 30 days? I'm going to have to call in the city attorney as to whether that is generally allowed. Okay. Well, I think for now it would be least beneficial for us to do it for the for the next month and then if you could get back to us on Yeah, it's my

the gallery around that. my recollection from history and I was not in this city but I was in another city that during COVID we um you know we just generally had running um emergency declarations that were simply on consent but we did run them 30 days at a time. So we can add it to consent though. Yes. Yeah. You don't have to discuss them every time. Dan, do you have any comments or thoughts on this? Everybody, this is uh Dan is our city attorney attending by Zoom. Hi. Um there aren't any uh limits in the code or state law about how long these things last. You know, emergencies. You uh call them as you see them and you extend them as you deem necessary.

Thank you, Dan. Okay, with that, um I will have the suggested motion. Um and I'll add a little piece which I will uh call out. So, I move to adopt resolution 2026-01 ratifying the city manager's declaration of emergency from December 12th, 2025 and extending the declaration until February 12th, 2026. Uh after um February 12th, 2026, uh I move that we also move it to the consent agenda unless it's uh challenged to be moved off the consent agenda and and discussed as an action item. Moved by Stpino, second. Second by Rivera. Discussion. All in favor? Yes.

I opposed. Chair votes eye. Motion passes. Excellent. And I think it is the y'all's wish to now hear from folks. Yeah. Excellent. Uh we're ready.

Many of you have done this before. If you haven't, John has done this before. We'll start with John Boonstro followed by Morela Moore. Mor Morela Mora, excuse me. Mayor Blackburn, members of the council, good to be with you this evening. I want to thank you all for your work to respond to the escalating presence of ice in Hood River and whether to become a sanctuary city. We all know that many cities are assertively responding within and beyond their statutory responsibilities to protect their residents from the violence of ICE. One part of this response called for in your emergency declaration has to do with contracting with community groups to organizing organize listening sessions uh and town and a town hall to listen to the voices of vulnerable members of our community. But I want to remind us that while listening to stories may deepen our collective intelligence, it's only the beginning of the city developing concrete responses to debilitating traumas and to stop the undermining of basic safety and security by ICE. When a family member experiences a trauma, most of us will drop absolutely everything to immediately respond. The same urgent response needs to be applied to injustices felt by immigrants and people of color. Your question as a council is, of course, what do we see in these stories of trauma, including those we've already heard and know, and how can we provide immediate citywide sanctuary? It's time for us to move urgently to shape our own public story of response. It's time for us to create a public story of sanctuary that will define us and become part of our legacy. Let's build a story of civic response that rejects the privileged entitlement to

listening but not really hearing and being changed by stories of injustice and suffering. Let's develop a story of civic response that finds ways to use our local dollars to help people with immediate dire needs. Let's generate a story of civic response that shows we are not reluctant to take political risks and that we will not be silenced by taking the bait of losing valuable federal dollars. Let's model a story of civic response that puts teeth into what being a sanctuary city can do to thwart injustice. We respectfully ask you to make that your number one job. Use the ideas modeled by other sanctuary localities. Then use us, your constituents, to support you. People vote for public leaders who will risk getting attention for being that comfortable. Thank you.

Thank you, Josh,

Morela. And then is it Tanza? I'm sorry that I I'm reading the best cursive I can. Zeanna Z. Got it. Z.

Good evening, Mayor Blackburn and members of the Hood River City Council. My name is Mela Mora and I'm a member of the White Salmon City Council and program manager at Kunidalis located here in Hood River. I'm also a Venezuelan immigrant. ICE continues to be a violent, dangerous, and disruptive presence in our town, cities, and in the hearts of our communities. They are a direct reflection of their leadership. It is now well documented that they function with impunity and break local and federal laws wherever they are present. They continue to lie and spin facts to justify their violence. But we must continue to hold them accountable to speak out against the relentless campaign of terror towards immigrants and those in our communities that stand courageously a song alongside our most vulnerable members. As a fellow public servant here in the gorge, I want to recognize how challenging it is to meet these escalating moments in our region. I want to recognize the efforts of this council in bringing your sanctuary city proclamation and declaration of emergency forward this evening. I urge you now to have courage and to use the power of your seat through the power of language and directly condemn this violence and create a clear message. Escalations of any nature that violate our rights will not be permitted within these city limits to the best of our capacity. We agreed to uphold the constitution when we were sworn into office. The constitution supports our rights as federalists, ensuring that the existence of strong federal government comes with a balance of power that is divided amongst the nation states. The leadership of all local governments matter more than ever today. We must continue to uphold these values even as more powerful factions of our government threaten to undermine this balance. This is the mandate at the heart of our democracy. At times, leadership requires us to listen to what our community is asking for and meet those needs despite the challenge and fear present in all of us. We must push forward and set an example of what is possible and what is right. The might of the current administration may seem overwhelmingly

powerful, but we must remember our sovereignty. And we must continue to remember the lessons of community organizers, local officials, civil rights leaders, and brave abolitionists, all who have come before us and push back under unthinkable circumstances to create a more just and safe world for all of us. We follow them now in their example. I have faith in our local government and our ability to stay grounded in our efforts and that we will continue to work towards peaceful community-led solutions to this crisis. I thank you for your time. Thank you, Mela. How is the Mela? How is the conversation going on your council?

Um, it can be challenging, but it's, you know, I think we have passed a lot. We passed our own resolution in the spring as well. Um, and I have to say that we also had a full room of community members who supported it and we used very direct and powerful language. Um, and we have made similar statements as a council, from the mayor, from our police chief. Um, we've done everything in our power that we can also bring forward any legislation that's at the state level that also condemns um, the violence being used against, you know, our communities. So, is Washington a sanctuary state?

It is. We have a Washington right to work act which is a little bit different than what Oregon has over here but we are a sanctuary state and white salmon is officially a sanctuary city since this summer. Thanks for your service. Thank you Z and then Lan Jer.

Hi good evening. My name is Ya Cruz. I want to thank you for letting me speak in front of you tonight. Um for those of you who don't know me, hi. I'm new to Hood River. I came here from Memphis, Tennessee as a community organizer. Um, our home territories are home to Chaka, Chukasawa, Kapa, and Cherokee nations. Um, although I am, you know, here and new to Hid River, I'm not new to organizing or unfortunately new to state and political violence. And so what I've seen here, um, I read the resolution and it does seem like a nice gesture, but right now we're kind of past the time for nice gestures. Um, and what I've noticed is a similar feel. My hometown Memphis is like a larger city, much larger than this. However, it's got the feel of a small town. So, we call it the biggest small town that you could ever be in. Everybody knows each other. We have a lot of relationships with our local law enforcement. However, unfortunately, that has not um prevented us from experiencing state violence that has cost us family members. So, I want to speak into this room the names of people we lost. So Tyrie Nichols is my Lopez, Jaylen McKenzie, they were all murdered at the hands of police and what we've seen is an escalation of that violence. Our hometown right now is occupied. I apologize. Our hometown right now is occupied by the National Guard and we felt that safe sense of security because like most of us here, we knew a lot of our law enforcement officials and people that worked with law enforcement agencies. But while directly impacted communities are going to be the first to suffer, not only here but in every every principality in the country and nation, you know, globally. we see that the white bodies are not exempt from this political violence. And I want to, you know, also speak into the room the names of people that have been most recently murdered by ICE, particularly Keith

Porter on New Year's Eve and Renee Good in Minneapolis. So now back to the resolution 20261. I ask that you put more teeth in this and make it something more permanent because we don't want to have to come again after we've lost a family member, another family member and say you should have put this in place before before we lost another family member. We see that ICE and police are not following laws. I know that we still have the the illusion that police might follow the laws, but what we've seen is that we can't trust an agency that is going to be reporting to a racist, classist, and depraved leader. So, we have to take our steps to say, "No, what we need as a city is to restrict ICE from entering city property ahead of time. Why give them access? We need to commit to not share non-public data from plate readers, from surveillance, from anything that doesn't need to be shared. Anything that you wouldn't share with any of us, you don't need to share with ICE. And then lastly, requiring ICE to notify businesses before they're here so that you can take steps to protect your your citizens and your community members. It's time for us as a people and you as representatives to understand that this isn't going to protect us if there's no enforcement available. So I hope that you can see that and you can act accordingly. Thank you for your time.

Thank you Zeke Lan and then Pamela. My gosh. Okay. Pamela and then Kate. Governor uh Mayor Kate. Sorry. Aspirational. We can only hope.

Hello. It's my first time here. I feel welcome and I listen to you and thanks for listening to us. At the event over the weekend, some of us sang some words to songs that really matter. We sang courage sister, you don't walk alone, we will walk with you. Another committed song. You do not carry this all alone. This is way too big. We do this together. Another song that's been around a while. It's still true. We shall be known by the company we keep in the actions we take together. I agree with the presentations before me. They were very aerodite. I consulted my now dead mom about this. Dear mom, I'm telling you about my life right now that I am glad you don't have to be amid witness and torn apart by things that we learned together when I was young and our witness to vigilanteism in Montana. And that's not long ago. Genocide in Montana, genocide in Europe, war, always wars. In college, I learned from friends who had been beat in race riots that was kept out of the news. I knew nothing about it till I met these torn people, our wonderful Japanese neighbors in California who had been victims of prison camps that we supported here. This is not new business, but it's our

business now. And we have opportunity to be creative, inclusive, loving, caring, and those aren't in nani words. They're from the heart. We are enough. We know enough. We have enough. Share. I'm totally in support of sanctuary, not just status, but actions, activity, and support in the community, as well as funded recovery funds for people who are torn apart in their family, their community, and their lives. That's the least we can do for what we have helped to propagate. So, please be strong with us, Cynth. Thank you. Thank you, Pamela. Okay. And then Tamira.

Hi, Council and Mayor. Um, what I have to say pales in comparison to everything that's been said so far. It just I came here basically to thank you for your service. I I've driven by uh the Mariposa development a few times recently and see that going up and know the good work you guys are doing. I've been watching the planning commission going through a lot of meetings with a lot of people um and the work they do and I just know that um in these trying times sitting up here is really really hard and you guys are making great decisions. Um, and I just want to thank you for your time that you guys are spend contemplating all this stuff, figuring it out, making resolutions. Um, and it's it's really hard work and you guys think about it a lot. I, you know, I've been up there and I just want to let you guys know that in these times, in these trying times, I know this is a difficult position to be in, and I want to thank you for it. Kudos to everyone that's here and everything everyone said. You can say it way better than I could ever say it, but I want to thank the council for what they do.

Thanks, Kate. Tamira and then Graciella.

Mayor, counselors, um, thank you for your service and I really appreciate you, um, having the emergency declaration, discussing a sanctuary city. Um, it's not enough. Um, our community is being torn apart. People are terrified. And for those of you who have not said to somebody, La Migra is in town and watched the terror in their eyes, you need to do that because we need to have teeth in whatever we pass here. This is not enough. Allowing ICE in our town is not okay. And it is not just our immigrant community. I have had ICE hit me. I have had ICE in the limits of the city try and run me over with a vehicle on film being witnessed by others. Is this what you want for our city? Is this what you want? We need teeth to any resolutions that are passed. And I understand that when we stand up or when you stand up and you pass this, it puts us at financial risk. But you know what? That is a risk we have to take. And do you know why we have to take that risk? First, they came for the immigrants, right? I'm Jewish. I know how this goes. We can stand up. We can say we'll put our heads up. We will pass the sanctuary city resolution. We need to do more. We can't be afraid of the financial risk because putting our heads in the sand, hiding is not going to protect us in the face of this administration. First, they came for the immigrants. Next, they will come for you. Let's do something, Rosella. And then Cindy.

Thank you. I am an immigrant. I came to United States when I was 14. I pay taxes all my life. I working hard. You name it. I work in different jobs. I know how be an immigrant because I am an immigrant. how I struggle a lot. Now I have four girls and nine grandkids. All my life I'm here. I live in Korea for 32 years. And really really this topic is so so hard for me because I don't know if you know what means sanctuary for us. Santory means protection. Santa means like this is my my place where I can feel safe. This is my place where I can I'm not a scared. Right now we having a hard times. When I see in the store the sign says ice is not welcome here. I said I can go to that store. When I drive my car and I see the signs we are immigrants outside I say we are blessed to have this type of community. But then I see a lot of people suffen a lot of I have a lot of testimonies because I am a community health worker right now and I heard a lot of hard situations about the fear that we are facing about the fear that we are living and I got a testimonies with me. Somebody really want real testimonies for Latinos for real people that are suffering in this community. I'm more than happy to share with you guys because what we have it is real. It's not a story that we hear for many years ago. It's now and it's urgent to take actions about what is what we care more about what the found that we are going to receive the city about the peoples who are suffering right now. The ne then the next time and the next years is

going to be the trauma that trauma that we are causing because we don't open our voice and say we are here for you. You don't have guys an idea how we feel when we see a lot of our peoples who are standing with signs about we are here for you. You are safe and here and the eyes come and get our peoples. It's really sad and it's really hard to to face these moments is really hard. So I really appreciate all all the peoples who really stand up and the ice and the cold and the cold weather. But but they are with us and I'm sorry because my English is not really clear and deeply I want to say more but I get stuck. I don't have opportunity to go to the school to learn English because I come to this country to work and this is what our immigrant community are doing working and working. We don't care how many hours we put. We don't care. We just think about we need to work to take care our families. Thank you Graciella. Ordinarily, we do not let someone read someone else's testimony because this can lead to stacking the deck. I would love to hear something that is written there. Council, are we okay with that on this instance? This is not a precedent. This is Could somebody help Garcelo read that now or

I want to hear it? about the real situation that we are facing right now and and I have plenty but this lady

thanks for all your work there are seven people I think I can I want you to read the testimony. Her name is Lola.

I'm going to help her read it in.

Thank you. Okay. Okay, I'm gonna begin. My name is Lola and I live in no way well with the situation that we have with the president. My son called me on the telephone a couple of days ago to tell me that he no longer feels like he can bear the situation. We're seeing so much injust interportation with this new president. He asked me to forgive him, but he knows but he now wants to kill himself. He doesn't want me to go out for anything. He wants me to stay locked in a house because he doesn't want them to deport me. He doesn't want me to go to the stores or to any other place. No matter how brave I want to be, I can't do it. I fear for my safety and and apart from that, I fear for the emotional health of my children. I ask for help. Thank you.

Thanks for reading that. Appreciate you. Cindy and then Amber and then that's the end, but I think we have some more. Abigail, can you help? Thank you.

Um, perfect. Um, sharing of um, Graciella's um, testimony from community members here. Um, good evening, council um, council members. My name is Cindi Ernnandez and I am a resident of Hood River for the last 5 years. I'm a first gen generation Chana Mexican-American daughter of farmworking immigrant parents raised here in the valley. I'm also a licensed clinical social worker and I primarily work with children and youth in our community. I'm here in support of declaring Hood River sanctuary city. I think it's fair that we are to say that we are all constantly being activated by the terrifying events happening in our country. For immigrant children and youth, that activation to their nervous system is much worse. What I see as a therapist is an increase of children with fear, stress, anxiety, grief, trauma, and depression. This can look like children having sleep problems, suicide ideiation, panic attacks, nightmares, poor appetite, fatigue, hypervigilance, feelings of shame, dissociation, headaches, stomach pains, and mood changes among other symptoms. The uncertainty of what could happen to them or their families exacerbates feelings of hopelessness and helplessness. This impacts their academic performance, their access to medical care and services, and they're missing out on important childhood events and milestones. We know through studies like the ACE adverse childhood experiences conducted by the CDC and Kaiser Permanente that

there's a linkage between childhood trauma and increased increased risk of chronic disease, mental health and social social problems in adulthood. However, in this developmental stage, there's little within their control. They depend on us for guidance, protection from violence, and care. As the adults and leaders of our community, we must hold ourselves accountable and responsible for providing a welcoming, safe, and supportive community. Our children and youth deserve it. Declaring Hudbury Sanctuary City is an important step in building trust between community and our local government. It's important because immigrant families belong here. They really do. and they make our community thrive. And while it might not guarantee safety, it promotes empathy, unity with our neighbors, and demonstrates that we will do the right thing to ensure humane treatment for all. If we want a bright future for our community, we must take action now. Thank you for your time. Amber and then Petty. Okay. Good afternoon. Um, my name is Amber. I am a longtime community member here in Hood River. the last uh 25 years I've lived here in the Columbia River Gorge. I have the privilege of raising my children here in this community. Um and I work at Hood River Latino Network, which is a field office of rural organizing project. Um both of which

work directly with uh immigrant families and uh help making change anything from policy to um day-to-day procedure. And for the last 10 years, I have worked directly longer than the last 10 years, but very specifically directly with families through rapid response um in communities throughout the Columbia River Gorge and the state of Oregon. I agree that these are trying times and I urge the folks on council to please remember who these times are most trying for. Some of us come and talk about this and go home and can sleep and not think twice about the next time that we leave the house, where we go, if our children are safe, if we are safe. And others of us do not have that luxury right now. I actually wrote something that I wanted to share to remind folks. Um, and I think I'm actually changing my mind after listening. I would love to just hold up two pieces of paper, two of which, excuse me, both of which have to do with the Japanese interment in the 1940s to remind folks of the types of things that we saw in the 1940s and that everybody in this room likely learned about in schools, people being loaded up on buses in our community, taken away, having their having their families ripped away, their property ripped away, and being threatened on a daily basis and that is exactly what is happening today 85 years later. I'd actually like to share a quick story about um a family that we worked with that was targeted by ICE and their family was torn apart during COVID. There was an 8-year-old boy who opened the door while he was in school on the computer with his entire class

to ICE who then came in in front of his entire class and took his father away and deported him. And that is something that that little boy will never ever ever ever forget and will always hold as somehow his responsibility. And I know every person in this room knows that no 8-year-old child is ever responsible for such things. But terrorists are and that is what ICE is. And I want to know when ICE shows up again, are you going to let me get drugged away? Are you going to let Tamira get drugged away or any of the people sitting in this room? The ask I have and then I will sit down is I would like the signage to include the no ICE agents without a federal warrant. I want to make sure that as you're doing the things you're talking about that you're meeting with immigrant rights advocates from around the community that have this experience and can give real feedback on things that will actually make a difference in real time. And I ask that instead of making excuses for public bodies, which is I understand there are concerns, that we show up every single time we have our popsicle sticks. All of us, we ask you to please take the action now.

Thank you, Amber. Patty and Patty and then Marta.

Um, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak. I had no idea I would be speaking. I got a little pressured over here into speaking. Um, I came today to support my peers um that we're going to talk to you all about the situation that's going on today. Um, and I guess I'll just share a couple of stories um, personally and things that I've heard around the community with the people that have been most affected. Um, one of them, my daughter. As you can see, I was fortunate. Um, I was born a little lighter skinned, but I have a child that was not. She is beautiful brownkinned uh girl with super dark hair. Um, and she came home when we first heard about immigration coming in. And she um came home from school and said, "Mom, do I need to be worried about eyes?" And I I told her, I was like, "No, you're a US citizen. Everything is fine. You know, there's just stuff that's going on." And I didn't really want to poke. This is a 12-year-old child in middle school. Doesn't have time for that. She needs to be worried about her grades. Um, she comes home a couple days later. Mom, they were saying that they said now that if you're brown, they can pick you up. Do you think they can pick me up? And at this point, I have no idea what I'm supposed to say. We live in Hood River. It was sanctuary. I got invited to come thinking we were in a sanctuary city. And so now the fact that we're having these conversations like many of them said that we're taking the time out of our days to come and um advocate for this is so sad I guess and I get a little bit emotional. So sorry about that. Um that's just one little example. Another example really quick was my mom called me the other day. She um became a US citizen recently. Um but she's a baker from home and she calls me and says, "Hey, I just got in a really uncomfortable situation." I'm like, "Okay, tell me about it." She says, "I have someone that ordered a cake and she

said she couldn't come pick it up, but I didn't I didn't like kind of said, "It's fine. We'll worry about it when time comes." So, she called her a couple days later and like and tells her, "Hey, why can't you pick up the cake? Is it because of what's going on? She said, "Yes, I'm scared to leave my house. Do you think you can bring me the cake?" And something so insignificant like a birthday cake for a family member that somebody can't even drive out of their house to pick up. Um, luckily it was my mom that was making the cake and mom's like, "Of course, like you didn't even have to think twice about it. I'll go take it." It's just it's just really unfortunate and it's happening in this town. this little bit of scared people are not h the kids are walking home from school and they're scared they're going to get picked up and now with everything that's happening I don't know what to tell my kids and I am somebody that feels comfortable talking to my kids about this subject so I just want my kids to feel protected and I feel protected here at home but the moment you step out of Hood River it just it's a fine line of what's going to happen so thank you so much for the opportunity

thank you Patty Marta and then Becky Rosson.

Good evening, counselors and uh mayor. My name is Marta Verdusco. I'm the director to the immigrant health center for Hood River Latino Network and a community organizer for the rural organizing project. I hadn't planned to talk because I usually 10 years ago I had this vision of creating a help center for my Latino community to advocate to empower them to teach them how to become entrepreneurs to be to teach them about civic engagement to come to the city council and learn how it works and maybe one day if they uh have the qualifications they could run for a counselor. But now this immigrant health center has turned in. It has it's not the navigating center that we envision to be. It's the rapid response center where people um go if they're afraid, call us at 4 in the morning that they're being pulled over by some random people. I never in my life would have thought that I would be living what my dad lived in 1979 to be picked up from Rosarus. Why should our funds that we with so much work work to ask for donations have to be spent on training people how to hide them from Nazis. And it's and and now I'm not gonna say much because I usually tend to cuss when I get very upset. Um it's not about just about Latinos because now they've killed white people too. So it's about all of us. So let's not play let's not be complicit to the racist government that is going on. Let's make changes. And I know we are a great community because

I've I've seen it built for the last five, six months. And so I think that we should be an example of the that needs to get done for our rights not to be violated.

Becky, you didn't fill it out. Can you just tell us what street you live on, please? Oh, she told me not to put my address. Okay, you got the Abigail waiver. My opponent. Next is Chad May. Oh.

37 years ago, my husband and I were trying to decide between several cities in Oregon of where we wanted to settle. And when we came to Hood River, it was the first time we saw somebody of color. And we said, we want our children to grow up with people of color. We want them to have a rich, diverse life. And we are graced with that and have benefited in uncount uncountable ways from the diversity of the people who uphold our community quietly continually. Maybe they can't get to English class because they're working two or three jobs. And and it's been such a gift to live here. And it's a gift for your all of your service, too. I want to thank you for that. I have one quick question which is if I'm driving with car without license plates, I would get pulled over and I'm not quite sure why that's not happening to many cars without license plates in our community. Um so I hope that that'll be considered in a in a tough sanctuary um law for our city.

I have a quick answer. I've had this conversation with our chief and with the DA. Okay. And I learned a new word, supremacy, which means that the federal law overrules our city rules. Thanks. You're welcome.

Supremacy. Um, my final thing is what Amber was talking about. I guess I'll just echo it that um I'm so grateful for all of you in this seat, but we have even a higher standard to hold because of what our city and citizens did to our Japanese brothers and sisters. So I think the history is so strong that I encourage you to hold that in your decision making in the next steps. Thank you,

Chad. And then Enrique Hello. Thank you for allowing everybody to talk. It's been really inspirational. Um I'm mostly just going to talk about uh healthcare and nurses. Um, I am currently the chair of the OA and at uh Providence and I know there's a lot of health care people in this room. Um, but I feel uh as to represent my folks there to speak to you and really encourage you to become a sanctuary city. There's not a day where I go to work where uh people don't ask me or we have a conversation about ICE and what's going to happen when they come to the hospital. And uh I'm also involved on the state level with the OA and I may be going down to Salem uh to help lobby for a bill that would improve our uh protections in the hospital that goes above HIPPA. and I would really love to go down there coming from a town that is a sanctuary city. So, as one elected person to another, I really hope you can support this for our healthcare workers. Thank you.

Thank you, Chad.

Is a question for Chad? Hey, Chad, come back, please. I'll make it quick. I just had a quick question to see what is Providence policy. Does does your employer have a a policy or procedure in place for the workers covering their um their facilities?

That's a really good question. Um I didn't bring it with me, but it was recently changed. And basically, if you're a nurse, you call security. Before there was a more of a robust plan with judicial warrants, but that is now hidden within the policy. So, um I would is there anybody from Providence management here? Management, but I think I think call legal admin. Can you repeat what she just said for the people on Zoom, please, Chad? Can you repeat that one more time? called the

I think that the policy I talked to our administrator and I think it's that they're supposed to call the admin on call and the legal team but I'm not Jackie is saying that she believes that uh admin calls legal be a great thing to um at Providence I'm sorry Becky just I too far you you can come up or you I

that's okay. Yeah, I I didn't come prepared with the policy. I know there is one there's three different policies uh when law any kind of law enforcement officials come comes in sometimes and it goes into three different categories. Uh but if it's federal, if it's ICE, they do need a judicial warrant, but I just don't know. like you can find it in the policy, but it's hidden. It's kind of hidden now. So, it's like you call security, they're going to call the admin on charge as far as I know. And I know I'm being recorded and I don't have it in front of me, so if I'm speaking, I apologize to everybody. But um what the new state policy that I was talking about earlier, just to kind of go back to that a little bit, it's based off of uh SB81 maybe from California and it just gives more protections to hospitals and healthcare centers,

right? So anyway, I'm certain I'm certain we would be interested if you could track that down and send it to us. I would love to see that as well. Okay. Thank you, Ch. Finally there. Yes, I do. See, do we have someone who can interpret tonight? I think we do. Marcus, thank you. I've watched you do it brilliantly. classes. Okay. I want to share how I feel.

Somebody that's been working here for more than 30 years. It wasn't my intention to come to the United States. Life brought me here.

Once I was here, the price was high. I've been here more than 30 years in this country. I've worked. I've respected. I've raised my family with effort and responsibility. Many of us didn't come here to do any harm. We didn't come to take anything away from anyone. We came looking for the opportunity to live with dignity.

Living without papers isn't living without values. It's living with fear leaving my home, fear of my family, fear of losing everything that I've built from one moment to the other. Even with that, we continue to wake up every day to go to work, to comply, to support, to give.

But with time, I learned something important. A community isn't defined just by laws,

but by its capacity of seeing the people for who they are as people. I've found clients, friends that without asking for much without asking much.

They decided to treat me with respect. That doesn't erase the difficulties, but it makes it more human. I'm not here to ask for privileges or point fingers at anyone. I'm here to ask for something simple that you hear our stories as well. We've been here for decades. We've contributed because this place is also our home.

Thank you for hearing. Thank you so much Marta for your service there. I think now we are discussing resolution 20262. Yeah. Great. Doug,

thank you mayor. Um, so I I suggested that we consider this resolution. Um, the struggle I've had with it is, you know, I heard I heard words earlier like we need something with teeth. And I think everything we are working on except for the resolution is where the teeth are. the listening sessions, making sure that we're reaching out to, you know, the Next Door, the Hood River Latino Network, understanding how other cities that have more resources than we do, uh, are responding to this. You know, uh, Abigail's been working tirelessly talking to other communities, uh, you know, u, city managers, uh, administrators, etc. You know, Glattis and I have had a number of conversations with other, um, city councilors, mayors, etc. to try to really learn where we have teeth. Um the the pause I've had with the resolution just conceptually is that it doesn't have any teeth, right? And that can be seen as you know that that's just what you're doing. It's easy to just put in the headline we have we have a resolution the city of Hood River did this and all the important stuff that's not going on that that is going on is not being discussed. Um so but one thing that I heard earlier uh in uh testimony was you know um where where I go where I see signs I feel comfortable. Thank you for saying that. Um it's a sign to me is what I've realized. Right. So if we were not in a sanctuary state, I have the full confidence that this city council would have passed a sanctuary city status a long time ago. Um, but I think that right now given the importance of this issue and the terror in the community, we have to do everything we can. A sign is is worth it to make feel people feel comfortable, but we have to continue the hard work that we've been

doing. Uh, and we have to continually understand how to build upon that work. Uh, and I think we have the framework to do that. Um, I'm glad we just passed the resolution to keep or sorry the uh um the the emergency management declaration going. I look forward to the listening sessions. I look forward to continue to talk to the community members, the people that are on rapid response. uh sos immigrantes, everybody. This this is how we learn what we can do through the collective feedback um from from you, from the people on the front lines, uh from our from our city staff, from other city staffs, from other from other governments in Oregon and and around the country, right? So, I'm I'm in favor of of passing it just because why not, right? It's if we weren't doing anything else and we said, "Let's move on and do other business." We passed our resolution. I would not be in favor of it being that we are continually working on this issue and we plan on continue to continue that. Uh I'm in favor of the resolution as a sign.

Sure. Um I understand why everybody here had the same thoughts as most everybody else. Um my concern with this is that as Kim has mentioned this resolution has no teeth, has no power behind it, does not enable us to do anything um outside of signing a piece of paper that says this uh status that we already have that applies to us that already exists. Um it does not change what we are actually able to do daytoday. uh we already fall under organ sanctuary status law as we have for almost 40 years now. Uh and this does nothing to change that at all. And um what I'm a concern that I have that may happen is it may end up doing the having the opposite ramifications is that it will garner unwanted attention and cause additional um harms that we may not want. Um for example uh St. Paul, Minnesota is also a sanctuary city. the status of them being a sanctuary city is irrelevant for what's going on there right now. So if this if this were to be accepted and passed, would it matter to uh the people that would wish to come and do this community harm? And would it cause the folks who wish to come and do this community harm that we do not wish to see to come and do this community harm? So

that that is my concern with passing this as is without any teeth attached to it or in it. That was that was the concern I raised before. Thank you, Grant. Anna,

um I think that it's good to be reminded that that is what a resolution is. A resolution is a statement and it doesn't have teeth. And one of the things that I really appreciate about hearing the testimony tonight and one of the things that I'm realizing is the definition of sanctuary state or sanctuary city is or at least the way I perceived it previously was that the state doesn't allow us to use um public resources to aid in immigration enforcement. And as a city we've said we're following state law and that's fine. But when Graciiela said um sanctuary means protection, I think that we can do a better job in a resolution or something by participating in the listening sessions and finding out what our community wants sanctuary to mean. And maybe we have an opportunity to create a new definition and incorporate that into a resolution and say, you know, um just a couple of ideas that I jotted down after listening to you all is what can we do um in our community to work with the schools, the health services providers and grocery stores so that that people feel comfortable going to just those regular places that that they feel safe going there. Um, and you know what? What can we do to help those institutions create something like what we've been presented with in our packet of here's what we can do at the city for having uh protocols in place for what you do. um how how can we protect the people that are coming into our facilities and how can we help um schools, health service providers and and uh grocery stores, just places where people get their bare necessities to implement something um or you know and and as a government agency, we can't compel other private businesses to do

things that's protected by our constitution. Um, but we can, you know, maybe we we can lead by example, which I'm happy that we have something that I think is pretty good for our our city facilities, and maybe we can try to help encourage them. But I I think that um because a resolution is just a statement. There's no harm in passing it, but it's not going to do what I hear you are asking us to do. And I think for us to be able to do something that's effective, we need to participate in listening sessions first and then we can move forward. Ultimately, I'm hoping for a motion and I think we should each feel free to speak our piece. Go ahead, Amanda.

I let I have a motion, but um yeah, I agree with Doug and I mean about the I don't want to be performative. I don't want to just, you know, say something that doesn't really have any like teeth behind it. Um, I also have heard as our last meeting that it really is important to people in our community. So, I feel like the sanctuary resolution is important and I want to see past for that. Um I don't know like for me this is I don't know if any of us have the answer of like maybe it's more of a um Dan question of like legally what can we do? Um and you know Paul you mentioned that you talked to the police chief about like pulling over cars without license plates and not being street legal and breaking traffic laws. Like I don't know if we actually are pulling those people over even if we can't ticket them at least if we pull them over. It's taking them off the streets for 5 10 minutes whatever you know trying to whatever. I mean I hear people saying like don't let them in our community. I don't know that we can just, you know, keep them out, but if they're here, what can we do to keep them from doing their supposed jobs? Um, I don't know, but

right. And so I guess, yeah, I would refer to Dan for some of that. Yes.

Abigail, do you wish to speak? No. I thought you were giving me the sign. No. I think one of the really frustrating things about this is that there are a lot of things that we would like to do that I don't think that we can do. And one of the frustrating things about that is that we have an administration doing things that are not legal and we're trying to follow the law and do the right thing. And that seems like a really a really excuse me a really frustrating unfair fight that I um it's a really unfortunate bind that we're in that we're trying to find that answer when we're dealing with problems uh or dealing with questions that as you know little old Hood River I never thought that we would be trying to uh have discussions about the supremacy clause of the federal government. Um uh and you know there was uh you know I had written something down last time um cuz I had had a discussion you know with you about like one of the times I don't you know say something because I don't feel the need to. So just to um you know uh make my self make my opinions known here. I'm going to read what I had last time that I didn't say. Um,

you know, I thought a lot about this uh sanctuary city designation. Um, you know, and I had a decent amount of concerns. Originally, I didn't feel it was necessary due to the state sanctuary law and also makes us a target for the Trump administration without adding additional protection. already had affirming res uh resolutions on the book and like the inclus inclusivity one we recently uh reaffirmed, you know. However, after thinking about it and after receiving public testimony um and hearing that the community really wanted this and that it's important to them, I think we should do it. Um especially because residents feel it is necessary. The Trump administration already put us on the list of sanctuary cities back in July uh when we weren't even on it anyway. So, it's not like they're running a tight ship anyway. um you know had concerns about funding cuts, but Abigail uh in uh the city manager packet or excuse me city manager city council packet uh really kind of broke down how we're not at least from our standpoint not particularly financially um exposed that much. Um, and again, um, you know, uh, it it doesn't matter trying to figure out what this administration is going to do because they're going to do whatever they want anyway. Like, that's one of the things that really kind of sticks with me is that we're we're thinking that they're playing the same game and they're not. Um, in general, you know, also thinking about the last time, and other people already brought this up, but in general, also thinking about the last time a group of people in Hood River

were persecuted by the federal government, people of Japanese ancestry. And what did this area do? Nothing. Worse, we aided and abetted it. And I think we have some sins to atone for. So, I would be reluctant to delay um implementing this sanctuary uh city resolution. However, if there are ways to bulk it up to add teeth, which I want them to be legal teeth, I still want us to be above the federal government and be lawful because we should be. Um, I would like to be able to do that. However, I want to weigh that against people also thinking that like we need to do this now. There's that sense of urgency. Um, I guess I'm having trouble figuring out which thing is more valuable in this moment.

Go ahead.

Thank you. When I was growing up, I remember that ICE came to this community before and I didn't have an understanding then that I was born here and that at that time that would help protect me. So I remember hearing that at Safeway and everyone would panic including myself and just thought they can take me, they can take my mom, they can take all of us. I want to thank everybody that's here today. I also want to thank my peers for simply having this conversation and for saying something because back then our council didn't do anything or say anything. My parents had no understanding. They didn't understand the resources and where they could go. As Ben mentioned, the city ended up on a list. And while I understand some of the financial impacts, there's been no evidence that cities have lost any sort of general federal funding for following sanctuary law. Cities do not receive federal funds in exchange for immigration enforcement. And we cannot govern by fear or potential retaliation. I understand again the funding piece, but Latinos make up close to half of our population. They are taxpayers. They are workers. They are small business owners. They are renters. And they are homeowners. they are parents of children in our schools.

If they are driven out or if they're kidnapped, we lose our neighbors. And even though I don't want us to think about folks as an economic value, we lose out on that money as well. So what's the greater piece that we're going to lose out on? The idea that protecting our immigrant community risks our economy ignores the fact that Latinos are our economy.

And even if there was no economic input argument, the answer would still be the same. Immigrants, they're people. They are not just a labor force. They They don't just bring a valuable profitable piece to the to the community. Like I said, that they're they're people and government exists to protect people, especially when they are vulnerable and more susceptible to abuse. Dignity is not conditional in federal funding. Communities that trust government are safer. We are not pursuing a fight with a federal government. We are following Oregon law and the constitution to help provide clarity so people know their rights, ensuring that city staff and that police are not upholding unlawful laws that are taking place and that we're mitigating risk. We cannot govern by fear. immigrants are taxpayers, their workers and their overall families. And if they leave or if they continue to be kidnapped, we lose out on our neighbors. People deserve dignity regardless of the funding threats. And it is our job to ensure that we are following the Constitution and Oregon law, and that's not risky. Like I said, that's that's our job. At our last meeting, I made it very clear about where I stood around the issue and I think that I am completely comfortable with moving forward and adopting the resolution for a sanctuary city because we stand in solidarity with our neighbors and

that as we continue to have our listening sessions, we update and we amend it as needed. In addition to sanctuary, going forward with the sanctuary city resolution, it's so important that we have communication and constant updating of that communication around what police does and does not do, what the county sheriff's does and does not do. And I know that we don't oversee the sheriff, but that we should be in collaboration with that. that we're finding ways to identify city police, county sheriffs, and even Forest Service law enforcement because we know that they're in the area. And that is we ensure that our police is enforcing the law. We're not asking them to do anything additional. If somebody is driving around without license plates, it's important that our community members document that, that they make the call, and that our police is enforcing that law. In our last meeting, we also heard from our district attorney that he is absolutely willing to prosecute anyone who is creating any illegal activity that is taking place. We need to ensure that our police of in law enforcement is recording this information and asking those questions. As I mentioned, I'm more than happy to move forward on a resolution declaring the city of Hood River a sanctuary city and that through our listening sessions, we continue to amend it as needed based off of what our community members are telling us.

Thank you, guys. Would somebody Doug, I I will make the motion if that's what you're asking. Didn't hear you. Great. Um and uh agree, you know, and the reason I'm making this motion is I don't want to boil the ocean on the resolution. I want to continue the work we're doing. If we find a way to, as Glattis said, um and others have suggested, adopt a resolution where it's meaningful, let's do that. But let's let's keep working on this. And I say I move that we adopt resolution 2026-02 declaring the city of Hood River a sanctuary city. Move by Stpina. I'll second.

Second by Rivera. Further discussion. All in favor. Yes. Opposed. Chair both eye motion passes. Thanks you all for taking the time. Such an important conversation. Now, we're going to talk about general obligation bond planning. Certainly do not need to stay. Um, but I will say we can't close the door. So, if you guys could, you know, not visit in the foyer, that enables us to continue with our business. Thank you.

Good job, people. I hope you're not too uncomfortable. That is the emotions, you know, the clapping and stuff. I mean, it's, you know, I call them Let's go, Will.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council. Uh, tonight's item stems from the city council work plan, which included as a uh critical project uh forwarding a um ballot to the November election to fund um critical projects. Um the work plan identified potential targets as transportation, housing, uh city facilities, and parks as a funding target for a bond. And um we've been working over the last several months to um narrow that project list down. Um on September 8th, the council received a primer on bond campaigns as followed by uh September 22nd summary of public engagement that informs our exist existing capital plans. On September 29th, uh council reviewed and ranked potential projects for bonding. And then on October 14th, we uh reviewed um those projects in logical uh bond u package options. And then finally on uh November 24th, city council authorized some uh preliminary polling. Um so uh PRAIS uh supported by uh Patinkan uh research strategies uh did uh pulled the b um the bond policy packages um over mid December and um has a presentation that we're going to share with you uh that goes over some of the results and also uh key takeaways. Uh so with that I'll introduce uh Jake Waggler from practis and then uh Ben Patinkin uh from the polling firm Patinkin Research Strategies and uh uh Ben or Jake feel free to take it from here.

Great. And I will let Ben do 95% of the talking unless I'm needed specifically. Uh but just for context, our firm practice does a variety of issue education and engagement work around the state. We worked with a number of localities on how to discuss and frame up a conversation around revenue in your community. Uh and we always start with data and so excited to bring Ben in today to talk about what we heard from the community and where they are seeing the priorities for investment. And so um I will turn it over to Ben. All right. Uh thank you Jake. Thank you all for having me here. Um quick overview of us. So our firm has uh uh been pulling in Oregon since um 2012. uh and uh do a lot of our focuses on both municipal as well as school district uh um uh bond and levy work across uh the state. So with that, let me share my screen. We can dive right into it.

I see the sharing has begun. I do now. I we see the see the presentation. Thank you.

Excellent. All right. Um so let me do a quick overview of the methodology here. Uh we did a survey of 400 likely November 2026 voters in the city of Flint River. Uh it was conducted um uh via a phone with trained interviewers. Um we reached both landline uh voters on both landlines and cell phones. Um we used a voter file sample uh to uh reach voters. uh and we uh instituted quotas and weights on the sample um to reflect the likely November 2026 electorate. We were in the field December 10 through 14 of last year. Uh the margin of error for any 400 sample study is 4.9 percentage points. And I do want to emphasize while 400 might sound small, this is similar to the size of a poll that we would do for say a congressional district or the city of Portland. Um this is a standard size for a study. Um, I also want to remind you that when we look at some subgroups, we'll be looking at gender, party registration, age, race, and ethnicity. Um, the margin of error for each of those subgroups is going to be higher because there are fewer people behind each one of those cells. Um, younger is under age 50, older is over age 50. This changes in four years. When I, uh, turn age 50, then older will be over age 55. Um and then uh lastly in this report we refer to shifters. These are folks who uh um shift out of the opposed or undecided column on a $27 million bond uh upwards into either undecided or support for the bond over the course of the study as they learn more about what it is uh you want to achieve. So just a quick review of the city uh voter demographics in the city. Um on the left column you see all registered

voters. Uh so um you can see the numbers for uh uh different genders uh age, party registration and race. On the right hand side you can see the demographics for a likely November 2026 electorate. And we highlight this here because uh a likely electorate is going to be different from all registered voters in the city. it's going to be slightly older uh voters uh over age 54% 54% of a likely November electorate 47% of all registered voters. Similar dynamic unfolds when you're looking at party registration. There are more people with a partisan bent either Democrats uh or Republicans uh than NAV voters in a likely November electorate than what you would see amongst all registered voters. Um and then a similar dynamic when you're looking at it by race and ethnicity. there were more voters who are Caucasian uh fewer voters who identify as Hispanic. So lay the land. Um at the outset of the study, we just wanted to get a sense of uh what issues sort of rise to the top when people are thinking about uh the city, what are what are sort of some of their top worries. And so we had a list you can see on the lefth hand side here. Uh the two things that really come out on top are number one, ensuring city police have the facilities they need to keep neighborhoods safe. 74% of respondents identified this as uh something that worries them uh um the most either uh very very worried or somewhat worried. And then lack of housing that is affordable. Uh this gets to 73% of voters in in Hood River. Um and uh again um you see a higher intensity for this item at 45% to identify as something that makes them very worried um compared to some of the other items on this list. Um and so you sort of get a sense at the very outset of the study. It's things that you'll be seeing throughout in terms of the

priorities that these voters place on um this uh police station as well as on uh housing that is affordable. Um interesting notes here just looking at the demographics. Um Democrats were actually more worried about uh um the uh police station than our Republicans at 77% to 68% in terms of the net number who are worried. Um that's not usual. So it's something that we wanted to call out. Um, and then also down at the bottom here, when you start getting into uh things that deal with sort of livability issues, uh the lack of sidewalks, bike lanes, pedestrian overpasses, um safe routes to school, uh what we would we see what we would normally expect to happen. So, younger voters, uh those under age 50, 63% identify that as a worry. as compared to older voters who typically aren't aren't as likely to have kids at home. Um only a slim majority, 52% identified that as a word. Um so initial perceptions of the various different packages that you all have been considering. Um we presented voters with four different packages. One at that is $27 million, uh one at 20 million, 10 and then nine respectively. And in those packages, you sort of explain what people are buying and then what the costs are going to be. So for the $27 million package, this includes all the different uh action items that you had on your list. So updating and modernizing the overcrowded police facility, uh creating more efficiencies for public works. Um uh replacing decaying roads and uh adding more sidewalks and bike lanes near schools um uh in order to increase accessibility. Uh also addressing Hood River status as the most unaffordable community in the state, but funding the construction of additional housing. And then we pair it with the cost. this bond will cost the average Hood River

property property owner $2447 per month. Um, we started with this question in this battery and then we went down the list. Uh, we did not rotate these. So, we start with the most expensive and then we go on down to see what happens when we make it clear to voters you're going to lose some things but it's going to cost less and see how people then go in terms of uh their their general support and opposition. Uh the bottom item is just uh uh the police department. Uh and then there's a mix of uh items in um the 20 million and $10 million packages respectively. Um so when you look at the overall results, uh the $27 million bond option gets the most support. That's gets to 47%. Um hang on one second. I have a handy helper here grabbing uh my water mug and get me some water. um you have uh uh 47% in favor of the $27 million bond, 40% in favor of uh excuse me, 40% opposed. When you start going down the list, again, outlining what you're not going to be paying for, but the left the reduced cost, you start seeing things uh uh flip in the other direction. So, a $20 million dollar bond um uh that includes livability items but doesn't have housing in it. Uh that gets to 40% um favor and 46% opposed. Then a $10 million uh bond um that gets to 37% favor, 52%.

Excuse me, Ben. Ben, I'm sorry. Sorry to interrupt. The there's a window that is covering the headline of this slide and I would like to see the headline. And can you is it an easy fix? I I don't know. I can't see it. Uh it may be that the the the people are in that space or there's some other funny thing because you know Zoom. Oh, it just just approved. Yep. Okay. All right. Got it fixed. The headline, the $27 million bond option tests best among the four uh presented to respondents. Thank you.

Um yeah, not a problem. Uh sorry about that. Um if that happens again, it's like a drop down. Just let me know. Um what's interesting here is what you can see like what happens. It's there's really and it's it's what you would we would typically expect. Normally we we see um more conservative voters who tend to be a little bit more uh um hesitant on revenue measures uh becoming a little bit more supportive when we start dropping the cost. And then you also will see more liberal voters who see who tend to be a little bit more uh um uh willing to pass revenue measures. uh um become less. So in this scenario, you only see one of those things happening. So as we go down from a $27 million bond, we lose support amongst registered Democrats going from 57% to 33% for just a police station. But you don't see a resultant increase in either support from NAVs or for from Republicans. Those numbers stay rather steady throughout the course of this of uh this battery. Um, so as you drop the uh what you're paying for, you don't get uh a boost in numbers from groups that tend to be um more opposed at the outset or undecided at least. So building a better bond. Um after we went through that exercise, we then uh offered voters just sort of all of the individual items that could be uh addressed through uh the any of these uh uh uh bond packages. So, number one, we noted to voters that it's accountable. Most people aren't familiar with the fact that there are annual audits that government uh organizations are subjected to. Um that we also added in that this fund could be o overseen by a citizen oversight committee. Um most people aren't familiar with the fact that there are state matching funds available for different things. Um so we outlined that for voters. Um we talked

about the police station remodel, what the public works update would do. uh what we're talking about when we say safe routes to schools. Um we note the fact that uh um uh it's fiscally progressive. Uh and then uh housing that is affordable street repairs and sidewalk buildout. Now for all of these um when we look at these the things that sort of come out at the top are number one noting uh the accountability measures and state matching funds. This works with both men and women, younger and older voters as well as Democrats, independents and Republicans. Um the accountability measures in particular. State matching funds also uh work well. Um you get majorities even amongst Republicans who uh like that idea as well as a police station remodel. The public works update a little bit less supported amongst Republicans, but again good numbers across the board. I will note for all of these things you have majorities who say uh they favor these options. Uh it's just a matter of intensity and and and breadth. At the very top you've got, you know, 2/3 six uh uh or more saying they favor that particular aspect of these bond packages. At the bottom here, like the sidewalk buildout, street repairs, you know, uh high50s or mid50s in support. So, it's a just again a matter of uh um uh the breadth of support here.

Ben, yes. Back to the slide, please. There are five red numbers on this slide. I don't understand. Um we had those red numbers added in there just so that like people could uh see some like again remembering that indep uh NAV voters, independents and then Republicans a little bit less supportive. So I wanted to highlight the uh strength of these particular uh bond items with those two groups. So the message of the the red numbers is golly a lot of independents support that ming funds. Is that Yes.

Right. Not not negative red but but notice red. Okay. Yes. Exactly. Um so then uh that's a long list of items and they were all delivered independently of each other. Uh they were rotated around so you didn't have order bias but um uh we wanted to you do tend to see some clustering. Um and there's a little bit there. I mean these numbers are fairly close when you get down to the bottom. So, we wanted to ask people, okay, uh, if you had to pick which one of these items, uh, is the one that you think is most important. And when we lay it out like that, again, we talked about this earlier, you see the two things that we discussed coming to the top of the list. Constructing more housing that is affordable within the city. 43% identify that as either their first choice or second choice in this uh um uh in this exercise. and then 37% opt for renovation of the police station. So again, these two things coming to the four, you know, and we're, you know, getting uh so let's uh keep going on here. Most likely to pick housing affordability as their top item. They are Democrats under 50. They're college educated Democrats. They're women. Uh frankly, it's a lot of like if this were a political campaign, I would be saying, well, these are these are very progressive voters. um most likely to pick the police station. It's a mix, but there are conservatives in here. So, you have uh Republicans just generally as one of the uh groups that are most likely to identify the police station as their highest priority. Um you also have college educated men, men are over age 50, older voters, 50somes and 60somes, as well as a mix of older Democrats. So, a little bit more bipartisan on this option. And then most likely to pick safe to schools, it's younger voters, which makes sense. um as well as some Republicans, younger women and and renters.

So, where we finish here? Um over the course of the study, just looking again at the $27 million bond. This was the only option again that had a plurality in support. Um there's not much movement, which isn't a surprise. We didn't really test uh messaging here. We did include a little bit of a push on um that favor oppose battery where we outlined all the different uh things that we could be paying for. um but uh um not something that in involves a lot of real message testing. Um and so we don't see a lot of movement here. You go from 47 to 48% yes uh on the $27 million bond, 40 to 42 no, 13 to 11 amongst undecideds. Remember margin of error is plus or - 4.9 percentage points. This is really no movement based on margin of error. Uh at the end of the survey, we did ask uh another battery of questions that included both positive ways to describe uh a potential bond package and then um negative ways to describe that bond package. Um on the positive side, all of them came out as descriptive at the top of the list that it will reduce overcrowding in city facilities and that it's a good investment in the future. Um I will note the two items boxed in blue. This means that they appear in regression modeling as drivers of support for a yes vote on the bond. So to the extent that a voter believes that this bond is a good investment in the future and will make Que River safer, they're more likely to vote yes based on this modeling. On the no side, um we tested will put a strain on seniors and struggling families living on a fixed income, something we can't afford right now and not a high priority. uh these voters really overindexed on this bond will put a strain on struggling families uh uh living and then those living on a fixed income. 65% that that was descriptive of the bond at the end of the study. Um

it's important to uh note this as you're thinking about um uh accountability for this uh uh bond and and things of like of that nature. And it's majorities of Democrats, 59% independents and Republicans who feel this way. However, when we ask them specifically something is this something that you can afford right now um only 48% believe that that is the case. Uh this last slide or second to last slide uh gets into sort of who shifts over the course of the study. Remember we defined that earlier people who just sort of move up the scale from no to yes. Um it's a lot of you know sort of there's some uh um more liberal subgroups in this uh category but also some more moderate groups as well. So you have Democratic men, blueco collar men um moving up alongside older independents, independent men and uh college educated independents. So this is the last slide in this and all of that sort of keys up a general conversation. Um key findings and decision points here. So number one uh a plurality not a majority are in favor of the $27 million bond option. Um while it's the best testing bond option starting with support under 50% is always a tough task. It's harder to build a yes vote than it is to uh maintain a yes vote that's already above 50%. What's something we call it? keep and hold the campaign. This is not that we have to build support. Um support support is concentrated amongst registered Democrats, a subgroup that represents a majority, 52% of likely November 2026 voters. Lower price bond options lose support as Democrat backers uh uh slow off while NAV and GOP voters remain unmoved. A police station remodel and constructing housing that is affordable for Hood River residents consistently top the list of preferred bond items. So, these are the four key points that we want you to consider as you're

thinking about whether or not to move forward here. Um, decision points for the council uh are the following. Uh, whether or not to move forward uh exploring an all-inclusive bond up to $27 million. Number two, uh looking at a police station plus affordable housing bond up to $17 million. Number three, affordable housing only bond uh up to $9 million in costs. or conduct a shorter poll exploring just the bond options above before deciding. I'm going to toss this over to Jake before we take questions if he has anything he wants to uh sum up with.

I think that's a really great summary. Thank you, Ben. I think the only piece I would add is to remind yourself you don't have to make this decision today that to refer in the November election, you can wait until July or even the very beginning of August. And so there's a lot of time left on the clock to be talking to the community, exploring these different options, getting feedback from community members, from stakeholders, and there's also a lot of data points that are going to change that will inform the prospect of a public support for this measure. Um, obviously, you're talking about having some different measures on the May ballot by other government entities that may also affect perceptions if people have already been asked to pay for another tax. the economy obviously is going to do a lot of interesting things between now and the summer. So, um I think these are a good set of options, but also want to underscore, you know, you have more time to continue exploring this and making exploring that conversation with the community before you have to kind of land on a final decision. But, um would love to hear from you all, answer any questions we can address.

Thank you guys. Will, anything at this time?

Yeah. Well, I just wanted to maybe append onto that. Uh, so you did have um the all-inclusive option, the 27 million was the only one that had basically a chance. Um, but the police station and affordable housing uh by themselves was not pulled. Um, and those look there are some indications that those could be even more popular than the all-inclusive bond. Um, so that's why we uh have them on there as some alternatives. Um, with uh uh option B is uh 20 about $20,000 $20,510 if we want to go back out and pull the police station plus affordable housing and affordable housing only because those were not actually fully tested during the polling. um talking with uh Ben ahead of the meeting. We think if the council wanted to go that route, we could turn around the results um ahead of your next meeting. Might not be able to have it in the packet, but we'd be able to get you the information if you want. Um I would note uh you know I Jake was talking you know we do have time uh to make a decision but um I would also uh emphasize that we do need to coalesce around some general targets so that we can put in good quality work to flush them out. You know, we have in there housing, housing, what type of housing, owner occupied, renter, is it low income? Is it moderate income? Within these categories, there's a lot of work to do, but we can't really get to that work until we know what the basic targets are. Um so I am hoping that we can coalesce around um direction uh sooner rather than later in order to make sure we have the time to do that deep quality engagement work uh to really flesh out these targets.

Um and then just general kind of overall framing. I know we've wrestled quite a bit with how to structure this bond and so I wanted to just for your consideration uh note that you know what your role is is not to tell the community what it needs um but just to determine what question to ask. So um by placing a bond on the ballot, it's not a recommendation. It's not even a request. It's just a question. Um does the voter wish to increase taxes to make certain community investments? And um every yes or no vote will be based on an individual person's priorities. Um and there um and so the only choice that the council can make on behalf of the voters is if we choose not to forward any question at all and then that precludes any ability to make any investment at all. Um so as we uh work towards determining what question if any that we want to forward to the November ballot um you know just taking off the bite you know small bite that we have in front of us today is to determine does the council have enough information to start coalesing around basic basic investment targets that we will further refine through community engagement. And if you don't have that information tonight, what additional information is needed to help get us to that place? And we have the suggestion of some additional polling if you'd like to do that. Um, so with those remarks, um, I think Ben, Jake, and I are ready to support your deliberation.

Thank you.

Thank you. So, I I had a chance to look at the survey that was sent to us today. And when I initially looked at the information just on Friday, I I will admit and I I have some questions around how the questions were framed. Like the first one that we see on page 11, it says ensuring city police have the facilities they need to keep neighborhoods safe. I'm trying to understand what data tells us that our community isn't safe with the exception of what we've heard right recently around ICE. So, I I recognize that. So, I have a question around that. The other piece is on page 13. It says the bond would update and modernize the city's overcrowded police facility. And so when I initially read that, it made me wonder, well, I don't recall that the police department has ever been um like we we haven't had enough police. And so I'm trying to understand how these questions were being framed because in in all of this what I see as a as a highlighting item is that um the survey repeatedly bundles police facility investments with other items such as housing, sidewalks, roads, school safety. And so even if you go out and you do additional polling, I have a concern that the questions that folks are receiving is that it's it's framing voter tester testing, sorry, voter tolerance for a police investment, not for voter priorities or for something that's around community outcomes. I have an issue with the word safer city. you know what data tells us that we have our city is unsafe and that

our police department is is overcrowded and I'm just trying to understand why housing which is a a higher priority of the council and I recognize that we we um we don't know everything and that's why it's so important to talk to community but that it's continuously being framed as an optional or that there wasn't polling solely done for housing. Um, so I'm I'm wondering like what steps even if we do move forward with additional surveys, what steps are going to be taken to ensure that the survey is not leading respondents towards supporting a police department, which is the way it's it's it's presented now um with other high priority needs like housing and safe routes to school. Later in the presentation, you know, it shows us that the $27 million bond is the most popular one, but we also know that the school is going to go out for a bond, or we're hearing rumors, right? They haven't officially said that that the school's going to go out for a bond. Parks and Rex had said they're going to go out for a bond. And so, we have three districts that are going to go out for a bond. Was Was that included in the survey? And it sounds like based off of what we were just told is is that it's not. So we also know based off of what was initially done that where we see the highest impact. And so I'm not saying this that my concern is specifically with a single department, but my concern is that whether this bond initial survey is really structured to reflect our actual priorities and the fiscal reality. Housing is our most urgent constraint as a city. And the way that the questions are being framed is really to elevate

the police fac uh facility overhousing especially in a multibond investment and that we risk misalignment with the voters and long-term instability. So I I'm trying to understand what data tells us that we have overhired police and what data tells us that our community is not safe.

I'll take a a first crack at that. Thank you, Councelor Rivera. Um, so I think just adding the word safety is just generally um we have to make concise questions and uh Hood River uh police is about public safety and so that's where safe was connected to it. Certainly wasn't trying to push pull um anyone uh and um you know Chief Holy always says this is not um we're not making an ultimatum around safety in this police station. his officers are going to keep us safe. They've his officers have uh been keeping us safe uh for the um you know decades. They're going to continue to keep us safe. It's about um is the facility uh something that uh supports them in that work or is it a barrier that they have to overcome in doing that work. So it is it's about relativeness. Are they helped or are they hindered by the facility? But I take your point. Um as far as overcrowded, that is a little bit more objective. Um we've done um uh uh um police facility studies with our architectural firms and uh toured other police facilities. Our um police facility is um grossly unders sized and ill equipped um compared to what is the industry standards. That one is a bit um just more objective. Um your uh the point about affordable housing not being um pulled by itself. Yeah, that uh that uh when we were looking at the results, I think that just screams that um affordable housing might have been kind of the sugar that um blessed all the other options. Um but the police station did just when separated out as a um investment target all on its own uh what did rate uh just as highly as affordable housing. Um, so I do think there is also evidence that suggests that those are

the top two and maybe could be paired together. Um, but I do think that uh the clear next step uh is to try to if we want to do more polling is to see how affordable housing uh polls on its own or with the police station absent um those other transportation related um projects. So that's why we had that as a recommendation.

Thank you. And I I I guess I want to be clear that I am not we've done a study, right? The when Mayor Kate was here, I know that we recently had a consultant tell us. And so I I do recognize that there have been some aspects that um we know need some improvement for sure. And so I don't want to dismiss the facts that we have around that because that that is factually correct. But when I'm what I was just curious is um when I look at the data here just on slide 11, 45% of those that were pulled say that lack of that lack of housing lack of housing that is not affordable is was a top concern over over the the police department. So my my my challenge is is the way that this has been presented to us. When I look at how these questions were asked, it just I feel that there was some biased and that folks were swayed to think of um you know like the word safety, right? And that that influences folks decision if I'm hearing, hey, if we're going to have money for safety, like of course I want to be safe. I want to make sure that our community is safe, right? And so I'm using I'm I'm going to go with that. So, as we continue to move forward and doing initial polling that we have to be clear, we know for sure Parks and Rex are going to go out for a bond. We haven't heard about the school, but there's a rumor there. How would that factor into the decision? And that we do separate housing only and a police department. And I have no issues with continuing to pull for a police station, but that we not use words like safety, for example, or the way that it's been framed. I hope I'm I'm making sense.

Yeah, that makes sense.

And if I can um I believe in the n in 2019 2020, there were studies done of safety and I think that identified some safety issues with the building. And I'd be happy to uh ask Will because you were here at that time to maybe look through and provide maybe an executive summary. I think some of the things that are safety are uh you know can this building survive an earthquake? You know this would be our lo you know could be our secondary emergency management place. The other piece um I'd say for safety is not just for our um officers which you know we all have concerns about uh you know do we have bulletproof glass? What is the entryway look like? there are some specific safety issues but also for the safety of people who might come to a police station. Um you know that we do our witness uh interviews and you know if people feel safe if our spaces were more trauma informed. So I think that's another definition of safety that I would not want to lose in this. As for overcrowding, our lieutenant and three um three uh uh sergeants share a space that is probably half the size of my office. So, um, while we might only have a couple, uh, officers on at any given time, uh, the tight the tight space that they're using is one not very ergonomic for different people in different sizes, um, but also just not enough space. So, uh, we're hopeful that a remodel, you know, doesn't actually increase the footprint that much, but maybe we can use the space we have more efficiently, um, to alleviate some of that. So, thank you for those uh questions and I'll if Will and I can look at what information we have that maybe we can share with all of you. And also, I'd also say if any counselors would like to take a tour of the space, I know you probably have all seen it at one time another, but now that you're focused on uh on looking at what a remodel could look like, be happy to walk you through and talk about those specific areas.

Okay, thank you.

And I don't want to dismiss that either because I I hear you. My issue is how this this data in front of us is presented and that it states ensuring city police have the facilities they need to keep neighborhoods safe. That tells me that we are sending a message that our community is not safe. And so I feel like that leads somebody to vote even if it's a polling in a certain way. And I hear you. we we don't have enough space for or appropriate space to bring in our victims. You know, I had asked Abigail how many officers have slipped because we know that folks, you know, there's a little that's factual information, right? I'm not dismissing any of that. just I I have concerns about how the questions could be leading the voter, the poller to vote a certain way and that there isn't more information that is given. And I also recognize this is an initial polling and that we're going to do more and I'm not opposed to polling specifically for a a police station in addition to solely polling for for housing. So yes,

Amanda, um I totally see what you're saying, Glattus. And I also just want to throw out there that like the Bond name had safety in it. I think right like so I guess you know like yes I think that we should be as clear and as possible in the polling but also there's going to be language in a bond that is going to be similar that may do the same thing or not right so like I don't know just keeping that in mind too

let me just note for the record really quickly the safety in the back of the survey on that question makes um Hood River safer is a broad term. We use the word safe for safe routs to schools. When we did that description, we also talked about how the public works department would be uh emergency ready with which has a safety connotation. We kept that particularly broad because it it encompasses multiple of the different uh uh pieces of the package that you were all considering. Um uh so just wanted to to add that little little bit there. Thank you, Ben. Yeah,

Doug. Uh I agree. Um I think some of the context that's missing is, you know, the safety of of people that are being interviewed, uh the safety of our police officers and their facilities, the safety if there's an earthquake is like kind of different than like safety in the neighborhood. So I I totally agree with that. um similar sort of um concern about affordability. Um I think people don't really understand what affordability means. My guess would be that they think that means low income. Um but like you suggested earlier, you know, like where do we go from here? What type of housing is it? You know, is it going to be low-income housing? it. So, I would, you know, I'd be curious if if somehow, since we know affordable housing is already um desirable, right, from this, is there a way to expand in a secondary poll similar to what you were just saying, if we could throw out different housing types?

Um, that's my first question. I have a second question after that, but what do you what do you what do you think, Will? I might give Ben and Jake first first cut at that as far as thinking of the order of operations of when we get into that more detailed messaging, which is where we're at now. um they have a lot more experience in this area. Jake, you want me to go first?

Sure. And I will add um we actually intentionally did not use the phrase affordable housing when we asked people in the survey. We said housing that is more affordable. We think that the term affordable housing has started to create a lot of assumptions in people's minds and not always positive ones. And so we wanted to go to that idea of making housing more accessible for people um at a range of income levels and and to the larger point, yes, we can drill into that more to better understand kind of what exactly would be a priority. We know that's also contingent on what's possible in terms of uh housing obstruction in the community. So would love to dive into that. And I I I'll just add that, you know, same with the safety stuff. Um, we would love to talk to voters for hours on these things. Um, we hit a limit of about 20 minutes before they start saying, "I got to hang up. I got to go take care of the kids or whatever." And so, I agree, it's always, um, our best attempt to try and get information out of them. And it's not as in-depth of a conversation as we'd like, but um would be happy to work with the city and with you all to understand kind of what are the contours of what we can do in terms of adding housing inventory in the community, what income levels that would be available to, what kind of supports there would be for that population that would take advantage of that housing. Um I think you're right, the more we can paint a clear picture, the better we are in terms of helping the voters understand why this is the right step. And to that point, I think that, you know, this community um since there is such a lack of housing, they are razor sharp about what what does affordable housing really mean? Is that workforce housing? Is that a you know, capital Affordable housing that's going to go, you know, all that sort of stuff, right? So, um I I I think that context is sometimes helpful.

We're having shorter conversations. They're about two different things. Perhaps there's there's some time to add some context there. Yeah. Councelor Savina, if if you um if uh I can uh Yeah. One thing too to consider uh from a p practical perspective is as comfortable as you are leaving it as comfortable as you as the council is and as the voters are leaving it ambiguous we may actually be more successful of course.

Um so if we can um use an accountability measure um to you know say that we're going to have a bond oversight committee that's going to help be guiding and overseeing these investments. It could be maybe some way to build confidence without tying our hands that we actually miss out on a great opportunity like we said this must go to low-income housing but then there's a grant that we could leverage our money and do middle income but well we can't do that because our ballot title doesn't allow it. So um Metro and the city of Portland when they did their ballot titles very very uh open-ended um and that provides maximum flexibility. That's just one practical consideration.

That's a fantastic point. Thank you. And then then the second question I have is is a bit of an oddball and you can get back to me if you want. Um I don't want to talk necessarily uh in depth, but like if if we can is there a way to take general obligation bond funding and revenue bond funding for the same project and use both of those sources?

Absolutely. Yeah, that's uh what we how we phrased it for the um public works department. Yeah. is uh uh I think it was tested uh in the poll is um you know we would put a certain amount of the project onto utility rates because that would broaden um the pay pool because there's many utility um customers who live outside of the city because that would be a way to broaden who pays. So yes, absolutely. We can mix geo bond funding with revenue bonds with grants with general fund appropriations. Anything?

The reason I asked that counselor is because, you know, we're hearing a lot about parking these days and there were discussions at some point about if we could take the Columbia lot and have a parking garage with affordable housing on top of it. So, I wanted to make sure that we weren't being there wasn't something we'd have to say in a bond or otherwise to make to and I I think the first answer your question is leaving it broad. I just want to make sure that that something like that could be a possibility without um further consideration. So, I appreciate that.

I have a question about the political affiliation data. Um, I mean, you guys, I assume in Portland and you're not so different from us, but the fact that we have 12% registered Republicans means that when you tell me that like 36% of Republicans like something or oppose something, I kind of sort of have this feeling of like I don't care. And but I just want to make sure you're used to this extreme uh political split and because what we want to do is win, right? So 51% is the win. And party affiliation when when when one of the, you know, Dem NAV Republican is so tiny, I want to make sure we're not paying inappropriate attention to uh segments of the pie chart.

Yeah, that's a good point. And one of the things that B does is, you know, we get a bunch of responses to the poll and then we basically model what we think is the partisan turnout for November. how many Republicans, how many Democrats, how many unaffiliateds? So, yeah, when you're seeing those overarching numbers, we are assuming, as you showed in that one slide, kind of an electorate that will reflect kind of the breakdown of who's actually going to vote in November. And so, you're right. Um, when we're talking about Republicans and their attitude, it is actually a much smaller chunk of the community than Democrats or even non-affffiliated voters. But um we just want to make sure you understand kind of all and we know obviously that different partisan voters have different motivations and you know particularly um to the question point about safety you know at times sometimes Republicans are more excited about for uh funding public safety or law enforcement in this case I think we actually saw the exact opposite that it was more that Democrats were really interested in uh the facility and making up grace to the police station so that's why we called it out it was pretty significant but to your Um, yes, we need we do recognize that Republicans represent a relatively small share of the electorate there.

I was involved in the community college bond and I one point was like super exciting like wow the the most supportive area for the whole bond is South Wasco County and somebody Paul said like there's like 28 people in that category. It's like oh right we're winning in the like sliver that's not relevant. So I'm it's kind of on my mind. Anna, can you remind me um how much we spent for this initial polling and then um you said it's 20,000 for additional information where we would pull for the police station and affordable housing or affordable housing only and do we have the money in our budget to do this extra work?

Um Jake or Ben, you have to remind me how much the initial poll cost. I think it was around 30,000. Um uh but we can get that information to you. we can get the exact number. Um and uh yeah, so the we were thinking if we were going to go out and repole kind of what this looks like is um look at police station only uh to retest it kind of as a uh um as a marker as a as a control uh police station only, affordable housing only and affordable housing plus uh police station as a package. Did I answer every part of your question? And

I was a little bit surprised. I'm sorry. I just going to add that so the the cost for this poll was $29,300. Thank you. I was a little surprised that you g gave us information about such and such a a a bond would cost the average person $28.38. I think of it as dollars per thousand in you know like mill rate and that like you know your business but that's on my mind like I know the library is 39 like I I think of it on that other side and you never refer to it in that way.

So um most people are unfamiliar with what a cost per thousand would uh look like in terms of its general impact on their wallet. So translating it into cost per month is a way for that makes it more tangible for respondents to start understanding the give and take in terms of cost versus what they're buying. That makes sense. Thank you. Yeah. The other issue with that is assessed versus market value. Yeah. Tell people it's 65 cents per thousand and they say well according to Zillow my house is worth X. So that means and as we know in the reality pay a lot less. Sure. I didn't mean to imply that you should have asked them mill rate. I just wanted you to tell me mill rate. Glattus.

Thank you. I I guess moving forward, you know, if if we decide to move forward with an additional bond polling and and an additional $20,000, I still have some concerns over this large bundle versus something smaller, knowing that for sure Parks and Rex have have stated that they're going to go out for a bond. And so this is where I wonder if there could be more exploration around multiple bonds for multiple districts in your next phase of questioning or polling because I guess the way I see it and I'm not an expert is that something smaller knowing that folks may vote for the schools and for parks and rec you know what whatot that something smaller seems more feasible and maybe less of a financial impact. And I say that also understanding that you know there's rising costs rising costs across the board and that um you know everything has has increased in pricing. Um so I want to recognize that as well.

So I am pulling for the school district. Uh so this is definitely something that I'm cognizant of uh and will be addressed. Um and uh I just also want to highlight going back just a little bit in terms of like uh housing uh affordability. Uh yes, it was underneath uh on on that slide seven, it was underneath um public safety, but it was a percentage point differential between the two in terms of the net. And actually the intensity of feeling leaned more towards housing uh excuse me housing that is affordable within the city. So honestly if you were to push me right now I would say like both of those things are top of mind for voters.

Yeah. And I would just add I think it's a great idea to work with another district to combine your polling. Um, and I think it's just really about finding permission to do that. Just as like I'm sure the school district would not have loved it if you're like, "The school district's about to throw out a bond for this amount." I think you just want to reach that understanding with those other jurisdictions to say, "Hey, we'd like to talk about your measure at the same time as ours or vice versa." And just find that way to kind of talk about both. And I'd say regardless um you know a poll is a good snapshot of public opinion but at the end of the day the best snapshot of public opinion what actually happens on election day and so given that you're looking to November I think there's a lot to be said for waiting until after May to make a final decision on this and see once voters have grappled with as you said maybe one or two other revenue measures are they ready to reup and support your idea? Are they like, "Okay, we did some stuff. Now I want to hold off and see how, you know, my pocketbook looks before I'm going to say yes to another thing." So, I think that's all things to be considering as you look forward on the calendar and when you make a final decision.

You have a follow. Yeah. I just just I I want to restate that the school has not officially come out that they're going to go for a bond, but there have been several listening session with Parks and Wreck and they have stated that they will. So I there's rumors about the school, but I want to be clear that Parks and Rexs have said yes and the school has officially not come out um and said anything publicly.

Glad. Yeah, I I like your point about um wanting to know about the you know other potential bonds that are out there. I think the challenge with that is that we're not going to know and you know necessarily uh what those bond amounts are, at least not at this point. And I don't know that polling without having that information is really going to get you anywhere because the the you know people uh you know philosophically may have no issue with paying for a city bond, a parks bond or school bond. But, you know, once you get down to how much is that going to cost, then even something that they're in support of, which we saw in some of the polling data there, like even if they're supportive of it, it's like, well, this is going to cause, you know, uh more of an economic more economic uh stress on, you know, seniors or people with fixed income. Um, so I think uh I agree with that in theory, but I think I don't know that we're going to get useful results without knowing how much is this, how much is that, how much is that. Um, I think you brought up a good point um about the the use of the word uh safety. I totally understand having to use that like I'm a marketing you got to boil down you know something into a really small uh you know term and be concise. Um, but I agree that I kind of don't necessarily see this even though it's police uh police facility necessarily so public safety oriented. It's not like, you know, this is a bond measure for like, oh, there's going to be we're establishing like a K-9 unit or like a, you know, whatever, like um I don't know, like gang task force or like you know, something that's like outwardly public safety for the community. Yes, there's the element of providing a better facility for um you

know people to be interviewed in, but I view this more as like this is more of like a facilities thing like an infrastructure you know uh situation that I still think is a very good case to make. you go down into that police station. Like I was appalled, frankly, when I got my tour as a new city counselor. Like it's a uh you know, my old office at the Hood Venezy absolutely worthy of of being bonded. Um, I do think framing it as this is a public safety thing that's going to make the community safer is maybe not how I would phrase it in terms of the questions on it. Um, you know, I wrote down stuff here. It's like when you talk you talk about it is cramped as opposed to overcrowded. You're right. there. It's not an overstaffed police department, but it is a police department that is working in an area that is cramped and does not have a uh you know sufficient office space. um it's outdated, substandard, inefficient, you like whatever, you know, like something to that effect where we're talking more about the severe issues with the facility and not like this is going to make uh hood like if we build this police station like all of a sudden you're not going to get your ebike stolen out of your driveway. Like that's not you know the situation that that we're dealing with here. So, I I I would also be in favor of um you know, I understand having to use safety in like the bond title, you know, like you're not going to get that in there, but in terms of the questions like I do think it should be more infrastructure facility focus as opposed to like outwardly providing more public safety for the community.

Just super quick, I think I heard in this conversation make safe neighborhood, keep safe neighborhood, which feels very different to me. Um, so I Sorry. Was there I thought it was Doug. I didn't see you. Amanda, I'm sorry. It's all right. Go ahead.

I'll be quick. Um, so I I think that that um regarding the um nomenclature, you know, how we're how we're phrasing things, it becomes a little easier to do that if we're not doing so much. Um, so like if we're trying to fit everything into a catch-all bond, we have to use language that's going to be, you know, used across all that. Um, the semantics get easier if we get it uh to a little bit more of a smaller thing. Um, I think in addition to that, the fact that we have to sort of proceed with knowledge that, you know, we might not get intimate knowledge now or in a, you know, a good amount of time about um, what's happening with the school district. um we know that parks and wreck is going to go out. You know what that's going to look like. I think we just have to assume that those are going to be there. And so to me that's kind of leading us to I would like more polling on the smaller, you know, two that were popular. Um, and then we could probably have some more context um, around the semantics because we're we're closing in and we don't have to be like it's for Hood River being awesome because we have to, you know, we have to have a blanket statement because it's all just like not as relative to each other, right? So, um, yeah, I think they're semi-related. I appreciate all the conversation and and overall I mean ultimately like it was stated to us whatever it goes on the bond. It's up to us to sell it, you know, to folks. So that's where we have to have all of our talking points prepared to ensure that we are doing that regardless of how many other districts could or may not go out for for a bond. So I appreciate that and and appreciate the conversation.

We're going to get a large and imperfect data point next month. White Salmon Schools has two bonds totaling like oo 90 million or some huge number and they're in a world of something if they don't pass both of those and I mean yeah I'm quite interested to hear the fallout of that. What else

uh looking for direction on uh do you sounds like not ready to coales on a basic investment target tonight. Do you want to move forward with pulling af uh housing that's more affordable by itself, police station by itself, and then the combo of affordable housing and police station? I feel like we that's Yeah. Yeah. Everybody okay? Yes. To all three. And I didn't see a thumb, man. You want to say anything? Yeah. Yeah. Is that enough direction?

Yeah. Well, and I remember council Cavaleria asked, do we have money for this? Uh so answer to that is uh this would need to come out of contingency. There's budgeted contingency. Believe several hundred thousand. $20,000 isn't gonna make or break this current fiscal year's budget. And maybe this is premature, but like let's say woohoo 27 million. Can we pay for the polling that No, like this is on this budget and that's over there. Uh it has to do with capital. So we can pay for capital outlay. We can't pay for programming. And so

and polling is program. Yeah. Great. That's important to me. I not like a backfill situation. Okay, great job. So interesting your science. Thanks you guys for your your good reporting and clear communicating. Thank you. My pleasure. We're going to take a break in just a second, but I think the next is going to be consent agenda. Abigail, am I right? That's correct. And if we could, Mayor, if we could take the last item off the consent. Uh the motion had an error, so I want to address that one. The waterfront treatment vaults. Yes. No treatment vaults. Yeah. So, if we can just handle that as an action item, um I'll be able to explain that. Great. So, we're going to take a 4m minute break.

So, there's six items on the consent agenda. We're going to make there be two items on the consent agenda. We're going to pull number two and number six off the consent agenda. I would entertain a motion to approve the remainder. Move to approve the remainder of the consent agenda items number one, three, four, and five. Move by Pollson. Second. Second by Stpina. Discussion. All in favor? I opposed. Chair votes. I motion passes. OLCC. We often do these in a separate way. Glattus, would you like to make a statement?

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

Thank you, councelor. Uh I would entertain a motion. So moved uh OLCC permit application approval for uh free at 707 Portway Avenue uh full on premise liquor license. Moved by Stpina seconded. Second by Cavaleri. Discussion. All in favor? I opposed. Abstension. Abstain. Chair votes eye. Motion passes. Thank you. Number six.

Thank you mayor. I just asked for this to be taken off consent because uh we as staff missed something in our memo to you and uh thank you councelor Folson for pointing this out. In the staff recommendation has two sentences. One about awarding the contract and an additional sentence about the contingency funding. In the motion that second sentence isn't there. So I actually talked with councelor Folson ahead of time. I think if the uh motion is just simply read from the staff recommendation I think that gets us there. It's just so no changes to the numbers, no changes in any of the facts, just that the suggested motion was missing that second sentence. So if one were to make the motion, would they read the suggested motion or would they have to add something?

They would need to add the second sentence. So my suggestion would be to simply read the staff recommendation as I move to and the rest of it. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Anna. I'll do it. I move to award the construction contract for the waterfront stormline relocation project phase 5 to beam excavating in the amount of $589,395. Additionally, authorize contingency funding of $117,880 to address potential unknowns associated with work and existing easements for a total potential project amount of $77,275. Moved by Cavalary. Second. Second by Pollson. Discussion. All in favor?

I. Yes. Opposed? Chair votes. I motion passes. Okay. Moderate income revolving loan program. Is that right? Merl.

Thank you. I got a PowerPoint to pull up. There we go. Okay. You may uh recall that we introduced this um program uh I believe in your December meeting and uh was directed at that time to move forward with an enacting ordinance for um your consideration and to um draft an IGA for uh the urban renewal agency to administer a rural program on the city's behalf. Um, so we've done uh both of those two things and tonight uh you know we're ready to get um much more into the details and the weeds of the program uh than we did back in December. So I'm going to start by giving uh an overview of the uh middle income revolving loan program or Merurl. uh talk about its um minimum requirements uh that must be in it um by state law and then also some suggested additions that are discretionary and then give you an illustrative uh example of what um the program could look like using the Big River Community Land Trust as a example and um we expect that they uh they've asked us to um specifically to um implement this program locally and so we expect they would be applying for it. Um, and as far as the action items for you tonight, um, we are not doing a reading of the ordinance. It's for your review and for questions. I'm still having it reviewed by the state. Uh, and I will bring you a final, uh, version inclusive of your input tonight, uh, for first reading at your next meeting. Um, and then, uh, we do have the final IGA um, in your packet that is ready for your approval. Um, and that's for the agency to administer this program on behalf of the city. Uh, as uh

compensation, collect the administrative allocation that's provided for in state statute. Um, and then also to receive a um forgivable $10,000 loan um from the city to help um with um startup costs. And that's to make sure that um the urban renewal districts are not subsidizing the creation of this citywide program. Um Okay. So getting into it, uh the middle income revolving loan fund was uh created in 2024 um by Senate bill. There's a initial $75,000 or $75 million um allocated to the program and it supports uh housing for uh that's affordable for households earning up to 120% of area median income. um for uh in Hood River that's about $128,000 for a family of four and um as you know uh no news that uh afford housing availability and affordability is a cute problem here and a Mariposa village is going to do a good job of increasing availability for households up to 60% of very median income. Um but that donnut hole of 60% to 120% is really um hasn't had u many programs uh targeted at that. And so I think that's exactly what the state um was trying to do.

Um the program really works like a sorry will can you go back? I would have guessed that that final bullet point would have say affordable to households earning up to under 20%. That would be the correct way to phrase it. So it's not like 90% is not the target of this. Nope. Could be as much as 120%. As much as Thank you. Great.

So the program uh really works like a single development urban renewal district or tax increment finance district. Um so this I have here a chart that shows the um the the tax value um that's generated from the development. So if you have raw land, it's generating uh you know almost no taxable value but increases at 3% per year. So the Merurl program looks at what will um the the eligible development create in taxable value over its loan term. Loan term is assumed to be 10 years. It can be up to 15 years. And so the state uh will loan the funds at 0% interest equal to the taxable value that the eligible project is going to create over the loan term. And that uh grant can be given to the um development uh immediately uh as a grant. Um yeah. So um like in in year zero, year one here in the uh in this graph is as soon as you could give the grant to the grantee and then the loan payments begin once the project actually uh goes onto the um tax roles which could take several years. So that new taxable value just like an urban renewal district is held off of the tax roles in order to repay the loan. That loan is then recycled into additional moral loans from the state. At the end of the repayment period, uh the new taxable value is released to the general tax roles um benefiting uh benefiting all overlapping taxing districts. The key risk to the program is that the city as the sponsoring jurisdiction is responsible for guaranteeing repayment of the loan. So if we give uh the loan you know immediately for say land acquisition and then it goes nowhere and

no taxable value is created uh the city uh ends we cannot recover the grant funds from the developer they've gone bankrupt they've skipped down you know we're left holding the bag. So getting into the program details um so it serves a maximum of 120% of area median income. It requires uh what is called what they call a a gap proforma analysis. This is to asssure that uh the money that's being lent uh or granted uh lent to the city then granted to the developer is the minimum amount necessary to make the project pencil. So it's really would this development happen but for the MUL grant and the develop the applicant needs to show that um the program is extremely flexible on eligible costs. So, like I said, it go can go all the way to land acquisition, pre-development. Really, almost anything that's in the value chain towards getting housing de uh developed is an eligible costs. Uh from the state's perspective, we can be more limited. And then there's a minimum 10-year affordability period, but the affordability period is as long as the loan is. So if we want to go up to the maximum 15-year repayment period, then it must remain affordable uh for that period as well. So those are musts. What um staff is suggesting is added on to that is that the grant is distributed at construction milestones. And so this is specifically addressing that key risk where we don't put all the money out at the very beginning. we um uh distribute it out um periodically just like a construction lender would do um in order for the um to align more closely with

the creation of that taxable value um that will go on the rolls. Also suggest limiting this to nonprofit developers only. That's going to make the gap proforma analysis much more easy to perform um because we know that uh 100% of the mural funds are going into uh completing that capital stack andor um reaching deeper levels of affordability and there's no um risk that it's uh resulting in just a higher return on investment for um uh investors. and then also um have uh suggest that uh the city create a credit review committee with uh minimum membership of the finance director and myself to be the reviewer of these um applications. Um so those are suggested additions. Uh although none of the suggested additions you'll see in the enacting ordinance, they're more just for discussion today. That's um we would just add that into the program application materials. What else?

Are those some of the things that you're discussing with the state? Uh yeah, all of those have been cleared. All these have been cleared, including the suggested. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Yeah.

So, I hear you. You know, you're looking for us to look at policy and then te staff will talk about the process. Um my question was around the mitigating risk and it sounds like that in order to mitigate that risk for the city to be on the hook for loan repayment that there would be a phased approach. So like what sort of financial conversations will take place before someone is eligible for for the Muro program just so that we're not on the hook, right? Trying to mitigate that.

Yeah. Well, and if uh that kind of leads into I've got a um timeline here that might be illustrative to show like when we when the money when does the money come in, when does it go out, what are all the steps between here and then. Um so tonight it's an enacting ordinance which is a very just threshold first step. Um we'll create application materials and we need to create a master agreement with the county and the Oregon Housing Community Services Department. spring we would uh get inter in inter uh governmental agreements between all the three entities. We need the county involved because that's tax assessor who would then you know um close through the money. Um if all that goes well we'd have a merurl program opening up uh in this summer and we expect big river community land trust to apply and then we would review that application by the city, the county um and the state. Um then uh if approved um Big River Community Land Trust would get provisionally approved in fall and we'd get specific loan agreements and project specific intergovernmental agreement attached. So you can see there's many layers of this onion to add strings and to um uh flesh out the details. Um uh then in winter uh we would adopt a project specific resolution for Big River Community Land Trust and then going into spring of 2027 uh we the city would draw the fur the full Merurl loan and the agency at that point would receive 5% admin cost allocation. the county would receive 1% um assessor cost allocation and then the remainder would be given to uh a certain amount of the remainder would be given to the Big River Community Land Trust in

a first grant trunch. We expect that there'd be um a second grant trunch when they complete framing or another objective construction milestone very much to be determined and you see this as two years from now. So, there's a lot of time to work this out. Uh, and then in winter 2029, Big River Community Land Trust is expecting to complete construction and then that's when they would um receive um the remainder of the the MEL money. Um, so each one of those times we're still holding back a whole lot of the the grant money and could and could return it to the state if for some reason this project becomes unsuccessful. Spring of 2029, the homes would be sold and then the Merl loan starts to be repaid for the next decade uh at 0% interest by the new taxable value that didn't prior exist before construction and then that repayment is recycled in through the state for more loans and it be around 2040. Then all that taxable value would go on to the general rules. Um but uh really stress that this mural if none of that taxable value that's being held off the um held off the rolls for that 10 years it wouldn't have existed in the first place if it wasn't for the rural loan. So it's kind of that but for test

and that's the end of my presentation too. So Oh sorry Amanda and then

jump in really fast. Um, two things. Um, first I I want to participate in this um and not recuse myself uh being legal advice for Big River Community Land Trust because this is about the program and when Big BLT comes in and says I'm going to do this then I can step back but this is about the program that is available to everyone. We're just using Big River as a um as a example of how this would work. Um but so I wanted to say that. And then the second thing is um you noted in the program material or in the materials that you gave us that this excludes voter approved local option bond levies. But you know one of the risks I think that I remember when we talked when the city talked about um initiating the westside urban renewal district there was some concerns from local other local districts that it was going to impact their tax roles and this is also going to do that. So there this would be small projects. I just want to confirm that's accurate. So there would be development projects that would be qualify for this funding that um like our library and our parks and wreck. They would not receive uh tax revenues for 10 years and that that will impact them. Correct.

They will not receive permanent rate um tax revenues but if they do a um operating levy or a um bond um this would pay towards those. Right. Mhm.

Um and then I had a question just to share with you all that I spoke with um Will about over the break real fast. uh that in the ordinance, it talks about specific um mural recipients operating like under the rental properties and I was confused about whether or not if a mural recipient say um developed a rental property and then sold that to an investor, would the obligation does that trigger like an acceleration where the um repayment had to be made immediately or would the um would there be a covenant that would require the investor who came in and purchased the project from a developer to have to um you know adhere to the rental rates that are set by the state and um also repay and will told me that it would be project specific not owner specific so it's not the person and that's just something that you said you you would tweak in our ordinance if we decided to so that it makes it more clear

that's it um I just had for I'm just curious like what size of loans are we talking about? Like do we have any idea like or I don't know. That's my first question. Yes. Yes. Um so 42 units at $450,000 sales price average sales price we think would um support a merl of loan of about $880,000. So um not insignificant. And like

you mentioned making this available only to nonprofits um which in some ways I support like I see the benefits of that. I'm just curious like if we did make it available and I don't know not in the housing market. I don't own a house. Like I'm very inexperienced in the housing buying and selling and all that. But like if I want to build a house on my property, I'm not a developer. I'm not like individual people. I feel like it would be nice if they could benefit from that as well. And I'm just like wondering if there's a way to make like restrictions on that. I know you said the but for things. So, like if they can prove we can't build this house without this money, is there I don't know or um shoot, what was my other thing? Uh anyway, just like somehow making it available and I don't know if there's even a need for that. I think there could be, but you know, I don't know. Yeah, I'd say um we're uh we're not the only thing we're that can't be changed are the state minimums, but after we set this up, we can modify and tweak this as many times as we want to. Uh the only thing that's required to change an ordinance is another ordinance. Um so you're certainly not tied to that forever. Um as far as you know, we could allow for property developers in there. that was a efficiency um goal of it's going to be much harder to review applications from for-profit developers than it is for nonprofit. So, it was an administrative burden thing, but um that's definitely a decision point for the city council. Um I uh as far as like an individual kind of mom and pop developer doing one or two houses, I doubt

uh I I doubt they'll I don't think the juice is going to be worth the squeeze. uh for how many how long and how uh in-depth all these agreements are and covenants and recordings and I think it will um make getting conventional uh lending difficult um for a number of reasons. I don't think this is suited to a uh onesie twzy kind of unit uh deal. I think it has to be um critical mass of a pretty significant developer to have this be worth the juice worth the squeeze. Okay, gotcha. So it's not just like one or two, it's like multiple units and like bigger projects. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Mhm. Then Ben,

so I mean similar to that, are we going to be really specific that we'd want like cottage style housing or do we want to be that prescriptive? Will we be that prescriptive or no? Uh I would recommend uh being uh not adding uh yeah not doing that not being specific. Okay to 120%. Yeah. So the wider we get it the you know we don't presuppose and unintentionally exclude someone who maybe we would want to fund. Um you know is my take is um make it as open-ended as possible.

Okay. I also had a similar question like Amanda around how many times could we apply for this and what are the total amounts like can we have two simultaneous loans out with two different nonprofits are is there restrictions in the amounts and the amount of I I'd hope that having something like this there would be multiple nonprofits that are saying hey we want to build a lot of housing what is the reality of that

yeah the 75 million is the only cap. Um, and there's no cap for end for how many a single community can uh can do. I believe uh Cous Bay and uh Tamote County are the only folks who have taken advantage of this so far. So, we are early in the pipeline. Um I've sat on a lot of uh stateformational um meetings for this and um a lot of people are very say um confused and intimidated with the complexity of the program and so I don't know if many people are actually going to take advantage of it and I so I don't know if it'll eventually become overs subscribed um but I think we are on the front end so at least I think we're ahead of we're ahead of most.

Awesome. Thank you. and uh I'm glad you're aware of that project and that it sounds like they are tapping into this type of funding as well. Thanks. Yeah.

So, it mentions in here that there's a you know a 10-year minimum affordability period and that that's a you know a covenant that's tied to uh the term the loan repayment period uh or whichever is longer. And then also in here it says that it can be up to, you know, 15 years, the loan repayment term, which would then be tied to 15 years of affordability. I know obviously that there's a desire to uh return this tax increment uh to the rules. Um but I do like the idea of having a longer minimum affordability period. However, I know that uh since you know this is going to be at least at this moment um targeted towards you know uh non or making this available exclusively to non nonprofits that do this kind of work. Are we not concerned about having a shorter affordability period because some of these nonprofits already have longer or permanent um you know uh affordability uh covenants in their own um you know housing agreements. That that'd be the one thing that's kind of a I'd like to know if we're not concerned about having a um you know longer affordability period. Yeah, certainly with uh with Big River Community Land Trust and Land Trust model, they're pretty much indefinitely um affordable. Um you know, I uh defaulted to the 10 years because that's what the legislation and the Merurl program also pretty much directs folks to do is, you know, the standard is 10. You may go up to 15. So, um you know, I followed the state's lead on that, but it's absolutely up to the city council's discretion. And um I believe in the ordinance doesn't tie us to anything. This enacting ordinance does not tie us to any terms. So that that is also something that on a project by project basis.

Okay. We can do that gap proforma analysis and we say oh no 10 years isn't going to cut it. It's really got to be 12 in order to make this one pencil. Great. That's really helpful. Thank you. What else on this grant? Uh I agree with the recommendations and suggestions that are included in here regarding the tranches specifically. There's you mentioned there's going to be three um setup. Is that sort of the standard model that you would follow? Three sort of uh milestones throughout a project or is it or is it project specific?

Yeah, that's something I'm uh specifically researching still. Okay. And um uh that's part of the $10,000 is to help me engage with um John Warner who helped do the development deal for Maraposa Village and tap into his expertise around construction financing and what's um kind of standard milestones. Yeah. Yeah. I appreciate that. It helps definitely mitigate risk um to do it in that manner. Uh one other thing just for awareness. Uh what other remedies does the city have available to it should a developer default and skip town for example?

Yeah. So it's going to be recorded covenant. It's going to be legally binding contract. Um you know so we uh can file suit and um go after them. I uh don't have much additional information uh other than that. it um uh you know it's a brand new program so we're all um kind of learning as we go through it. Um so I think you know it potentially bankruptcy could uh could discharge this and that's I think it's a real it's a real risk

uh potential asset uh forfeite procedure on our part or anything like that. No. Okay. uh not the property itself because um yeah this we cannot go through tax foreclosure uh in order to get them all repaid. I do know that. Okay. Just want to check the downside risks. Thanks. Y anything else on this? What do you need? Will uh need um just the IG uh with the agency of this suggested motion on page 88. 88. Go for it. We can rock paper scissors for it. Uh I move that the city council authorize the provided intergovernmental agreement with the Hood River urban renewal agency.

I'll second. Moved by Pulse and second by Rivera. Discussion. All in favor? I oppose. Chair votes eye. Motion passes. Thank you. Will discussion items. Planning commission. Uh yes, just a uh update that we need to do interviews for uh a new planning uh commissioner and so looking for one or two council members who are willing to help staff with those interviews go ahead. So, councelor Cavaleri, did anybody get put out inv. Okay, thank you. I will

I think Doug had his hand raised first. So, I don't want to see I don't want to fight for who's going to help. I'm open to whatever. Except for me, restrictions are as long as you're on a Friday when I don't work, then I'm I can be back up to Glattus. I don't mind because I got to participate in the last one. So, if she can't make it, I'm happy to fill it. Glattus number one, Anna number two, and Doug's okay in the cold. Sure. Yeah. Okay. As we Thank you. I will pass that on to the planning director and we'll reach out to make arrangements. Thank you. Anything else, Abigail and city manager? No other updates. Oh, sorry. Can Can you remind me who's who's coming off? Uh I think we have one seat that was still not filled. Okay, that's right. That's right. Okay.

I think we had a term ended and that person did not reup. Thank you. Is sorry. Is this also like how we're adding are we adding a seat or something or no? We just changed the regulations about who can be okay. Terrible. Exactly. Good one. Uh, anything else, Abigail? Uh, committee reports. Amanda, um, I there was a McKEd meeting. I unfortunately missed it because my business was flooding and I spent six hours mitigating water. Um, and then I kind of forgot that that meeting happened and I forgot to look and see what happened at the meeting that I missed. So,

we'll see is the best possible. I will come back next time with Thank you. I can't update nothing Doug.

Uh, sister city meets tomorrow. You you've got it covered. Okay. So, Glattus is going to attend that. uh way back in the way long time ago in December um VHR had their um meeting um largely procedural meeting. They uh had a uh they proposed the financial policy uh and adopted it regarding just how they're going to report to the board members about things like budget versus actuals and just a little bit more clarity uh for Katie and team there about how to prepare that. Um yeah, that that was probably the most uh the biggest thing. You know, they did their their normal uh revenue and expense overview. Everything's, you know, on budget. Um solid financial position with revenue, controlled expenses, healthy operating capacity heading into the remainder of the year, etc. Um they also heard from the applicant uh for the uh now uh denied application for the uh the Marriott Hotel.

So they had a presentation on that. Um yeah, this that's pretty much uh all the all the to report on for now.

Yeah, Cerudo meets tomorrow afternoon, so I'll have a report on that. And then I I think MCAC is the day after our next meeting. So I'll have a report out there. I did have a chance to go to the county meeting where our county peers were having similar discussions around, you know, what should we do, if anything, around a sanctuary city. I had a couple one-on- ones with uh a couple county commissioners and um the county did direct Allison to coordinate with Allison uh sorry Abigail to move forward. So I appreciate the the efforts there and that they were more than open to joining some of these listening sessions that we have scheduled. So there were many other things but that's definitely the the key item that I that I remembered and I didn't take my notes. So that's it for me.

Thank you, Ben. Uh I attended the CAT board meeting on also way way back in December 17th. Um also had they had conversations about um ICE in particular like employee training. Um had you know similar discussions that we had here. Uh an interesting uh point that came out of that is that um you know uh there was a mention that uh there was uh decreased wrership in the upper valley and that was um believed uh to be due due to uh the presence over the um or concerns over the presence of ice. Um so that was you know interesting to hear that uh not surprising. Um and also of note is that uh they approved an IGA uh with the port over the uh development of a regional uh transit hub um they're working on. Um it you know was very very preliminary uh stages but basically would be um somewhere around like lot one kind of on the waterfront. There's multiple uh sites that it could be at. So it's not like dialed in. This is for like the um you know like design and portion here. But uh in like the board packet there were some like you know kind of visualizations of it and it's basically kind of looks like a pretty decent size like kind of bus shelter um and with restrooms. Uh, so, um,

larger than the bus shelter that's at the port now, but smaller than the cat home office. Um, definitely larger than the one at the, uh, port now and I think probably smaller than the one at the CAT office. So, this is for um, yeah, design, build, and maintain. uh it's funded through an ODOT grant and I believe the 539 uh grant was the other element of it but uh again this is kind of uh early stages like they haven't gotten into design part but um I thought that that was uh something pretty interesting that came out of the meeting. So yeah, uh, next one is January 21st. Nothing for me.

Nothing. Uh, nothing for me on commit. No, I uh had a nice tour of Maraposa Village. I got to sit in the construction trailer for the owner architect contractor meeting and those guys are getting it done. There's 90 personnel on site building that thing. It is just happening. And then we walked around and it's happening. Amazing. Amazing. Abigail periodically has kept us informed of like issues with the sewer pipe access and stuff, but wow. You know, once you let the professionals go, they Yeah. Amazing. What's that, guys? Go ahead. Can you remind me of the estimated date where of completion?

I think some of them will be occupied this year. A bunch beyond into 27, but some in 26. Abigail, am I? I'm not sure about the interim piece, but the full um completion date, I think what we're working on is January 2027. That's right. And there will be a phased opening. Um so something a few will open up ahead of that. I I can't remember off the top of my head. Mhm.

Um, on the mayor comments, I was reading an article in the Oregonian about Portland City Council has just expanded and reformed and yada yada and they have 12 people and they were having these hoursl long vituprative nasty discussions about who will be council president. And as we navigate like these super emotional issues, I just am so congratulatory to us for like working together and it's no joke like the emotions are so high and there it's issues of you know this is the only person of color and you're not supporting them and therefore you're a this and it's like whoa. So let us remember to survive to agree and disagree another day. Good job. Us council comments. Anna,

um I had three things. Um one, I was approached by a con a con constituent about the idea of a scramble on Oak um at the traffic light at Second and Oak. Um the idea of maybe programming the light so that uh when it all tra all car traffic is stopped at red and let pedestrians go wherever they need to go. And I've seen in other bigger cities where they do like a really cool X in the middle so people know they can they can jaywalk, they can do whatever they want and just get to where they need to be and then the cars have a turn. So that was something I was just going to share with everybody. Um I don't know how that is made happen or if we need something but um the scramble that's an idea. Uh David Osborne is a candidate for Oregon State Representative House District 52. His top issues are affordable housing, funding for public education, health care, and preschool for all, and environmental stewardship. All good things. Um, a lot of them align with what our values are. So, if you have an opportunity to meet with him, I know he's reached out to all of us. Um, I would I had a lovely conversation with him and I'd encourage each of us to to chat with him if you could if you can. Um, and then kind of along what you were just sharing, Paul, um, I just wanted to acknowledge that the last few meetings have been pretty hard and as council members and community members and adults, um, we are faced with challenging issues and each of us are here to as representatives for our entire community to make policy decisions that um, enhance the quality of life in Hood River. And as a cornerstone of democracy is listening and being open to the ideas and values of others. I'm really genuinely grateful to get to work with you guys. And I respect and value the perspectives that you share. And I just want to say that um as I was thinking about the last few meetings and reflecting on my first year as a council member, uh the well-known paraphrase attributed to Gandhi came to

mind of be the change that you want to see in the world. And um as a council, I'm glad that we don't descend and we should not descend into the use of ad hominemum attacks or impugn the motives or character of one another or the individuals that we represent. And the change that I want to see and that I'm committed to adhering to the decorum and order requirements in our own council procedures um specifically section 5.4C foresee and I will be open and respectful um to the ideas and perspectives of presented by each of you and by the people um that come to talk to us and that um I'm I'm going to commit to trying to do that even when it's not reciprocated. So I just wanted to say that I think that that's important and I'm grateful that I can

take the words out of my mouth. Nothing for me.

Yeah, I do have a couple things. So, I promised Maya that I would bring it up again. There is the 2026 Manuro Yasui student contest. Uh the mayor and I had a chance to join and uh students had the opportunity to create any sort of drawing and then that was created into a postcard. Uh so the awards are $500 for the educator engagement award. Uh the senior division, which is 9th through 12th grade, first place is $1,000. Second place is $500. The junior division, which is fifth to 8th, that's uh $500, and second place is $250. Um you can for more information, you can visit their website, manor minor yasuleacy.org/ studentcontest, or you can email at info@manuroyasuilleacy.org. I also had a chance to connect with David as well and he had stated he had reached out to each one of you. So if you have an opportunity to connect with him I think it's really important. I also really appreciate when candidates reach out to each one of us one-on-one. Um, so I I appreciate that that there and I also had an opportunity to listen to the city council meetings and um just the way that that process went and overall I like I mentioned in my comments earlier specifically when it comes to immigration. I remember when I was growing up and and ISIS come to our community many times that I I don't recall their conversations or proclamations or declarations or resolutions to make people feel like they are seen and valued. And so I do appreciate that they have been tough conversations but that we are doing something. And during my almost seven years on council, we have had, you know, at least three different

now four, right, proclamations, resolutions, ordinances specifically around ensuring that every single member of our community feels valued, feels seen, appreciated, and, you know, supported. So, I I know that there will be many more hard conversations that will continue to come just given the the current landscape and this federal administration. And um I appreciate every single one of you and I know that we don't always agree and that's okay. So, I just similar to what's already been said, I I appreciate working with all of you and um these are these are troubling times. So, thanks. Good.

Yeah. Thanks. I'll echo the comments of and echo your echo, Ben, of of the comments. Um, it's not easy stuff up here and uh, you know, I mean, I wish we could have a lot more time to work on other parts of the agenda and not add tons of hours and work to everybody, but we are where we are and I feel like we have to meet this moment and I feel like we're making some really good steps. Uh, I want to see the work continue. Um I did have the chance to attend um the last rally that um that they had in front of the hospital for um you know um you know sosantes um getting good feedback that they're encouraged by the work that Abigail is doing um that the work that we're doing. I I would like somehow to formalize and maybe this is part of the town hall or listening sessions how people can if they see something say something let the city know um so that it's not um so haphazard or it's like oh I'm going to I mean I would encourage them to reach out to every single one of us and talk to us when they see us in the community but it would be awesome to have some sort of formal way to add the feedback beyond you know coming to council and whatnot just because I feel like um you know if if there's if there is an event that happens. Um, we know that it just happens so quickly in a lot of cases. Uh, hopefully somebody there is is from rapid response, but you know, we heard from other, you know, communities that we've talked to like can be 2 minutes and they leave a car running in the middle, right? So, uh, people are going to want to know what was our police response. It's like, well, our police got there afterwards or whatever. But, you know, it it would be nice to know when there is an event, you know, what what happened with with our response. um even if it's that we got there late, you know, that that sort of thing. I feel like that transparency is really important. And so I feel like a couple things that I've learned from pe talking to people in the community and uh you know, I understand that you know that there was there was also another big uh protest over the weekend that that went well. I I didn't attend that one, but I'm been trying to attend everything

that I can to sort of get feedback, but having some line of communication open that's formalized and well understood. Um, you know, of course we can have a 24-hour hour hotline or something like that, but you know, making sure that people know that the city's received information, making sure that we're responding to when there is an event, you know, what the city's involvement was and or was not, all that sort of stuff, I think just helps build the the transparency, helps build the the trust, and I'm glad we passed the resolution earlier. But that's the kind of stuff I think that backs that kind of stuff up in addition to the the things that we saw with um the emergency declaration, the listening sessions, all the stuff that Abigail's been doing. Let's just keep the u eye on the ball there. Um, and thank you all for your participation earlier. I thought everybody was really eloquent and I I didn't necessarily think we were going to go that way with u passing a resolution because there's like so many things. It's like good, bad, good that and everything, but I think we responded to the community uh regarding that and that's what we're supposed to be doing.

Grant try to be brief brief. Um, everybody in the community should at all input times be able to feel welcome, heard, appreciated. Uh, we are here to serve our community. Um, there's I'll skip some of the others. Um, at at the very start of the meeting, um, our center let us know ways that we can give her direct feedback. Um and so we can share that information with all of our constituents. Um the uh an idea that councelor Cavaleri and I've talked a little bit about just in passing when we've seen each other in the street is the oldfashioned letterw writing campaign. So if people from the community wish to affect um their state government at least uh people in the community get together and collect a whole bunch of signatures and send a bunch of letters down there. Um apparently there's a somebody that will listen. So, that may be a helpful avenue. Um, but yeah, I appreciate everybody that came tonight. Appreciate all the work that we did tonight very much. And, uh, like councelor Gakei has said in the past, um, I believe that we should live by our values and principles and not sell them out.

I don't have much, but I agree with all of you. So, thank you for being eloquent and saying things well. Okay, that takes us to uh Abigail and I have made this executive decision and we can hate it and change it, but we just put urban rule at the end like we never and now because so the port so the port could like leave, but now the port isn't here. So, uh I will now hand the gavvel to chair stina. Thank you so much. I will now call to order the Hood River Urban Renewal Agency board meeting. Um, any additions or corrections? Well, no, there are not.

I'm not seeing any audience members here. Are there any audience members? Okay. Thank you, Jen. Jen's indicating no. Uh, the first uh item that we have is the approval of the consent agenda. I would send a clean motion or if there's any discussion about it, please say so. I move we approve the consent agenda. Motion by Cavaleri. Second. Second by Folson. Any discussion? All those in favor?

Opposed? Chair votes eye. Consent agenda uh passes. Regular business items. The first is the election of the urban renewal agency officers. I'll just uh add some editorial here that uh Will and I have discussed. uh my intention to remain chair uh and Glattus and I am have discussed her intention to remain as vice chair. Happy to have others put their name in the hat now and all this sort of stuff but uh so move wanted to second is there any well is there any discussion or presentation on this at all? There is not. Okay.

So I I think we need we need two different motions. We need a motion for for and they're in the packet first do a motion on that. I move Doug stays chair. Second. Okay. Uh motion by Blackburn and second by Pollson. Any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? I don't think I should vote, but I guess votes I uh and uh I'll remain the chair. Thank you all for the uh the confidence to to administer this. Um I'll now uh ask if there is anybody wants to make a motion on the vice chair. I move class stays vice chair.

Second. First by Blackburn, second by Pollson. Any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? Abstain. Right. I don't myself or can you do I vote for myself? You can vote for yourself. Oh, I can. Okay. Okay. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Uh any opposed? Chair votes I and uh Glattus will be vice chair. Uh thanks. Next regular business item is the uh the mer.

Yeah, thank you. This is um just the accompanying side of the intergovernmental agreement that was approved by city council earlier tonight. Um so uh I don't think it needs a presentation. Happy to answer any questions, but um uh there's a suggestion motion in your packet. So we don't have to pretend there were different people or you do have to do the pretending. I move we authorize the agency administrator to execute an intergovernmental agreement with city of Hood River for administration of a local moderate income revolving loan program. Motion by Cavaleri. Second. Second by Gakei. Any discussion? All those in favor?

Yes. Opposed? Chair votes I. Passes. Uh any administrator updates? None tonight.

Uh items from agency members. Anybody have one? I I have one. Um I think that uh you know I sort of brought brought this up earlier. I think something we should maybe consider when the time is appropriate later on with uh downtown is if there's remaining money for downtown if we should maybe revisit looking into a parking structure. I think housing should be a component of that. Um I've had the opportunity to speak with some of the people that were around um you know council when they looked at the parking garage sort of options before. Public discourse is kind of like parking parking parking. It's kind of you know bubbled up a lot u regarding the you know the the discussion about the the hotel with planning commission and everything. I've been hearing a lot of people about parking. So just wanted to put that out there. I've discussed that idea with well but um start thinking about what uh what what you think about that for another time. All good. Okay, with that I will adjourn the urban renew uh urban hood river urban renewal agency board meeting and pass the gavl back to Mayor Blackburn to adjourn city council

and I'll reconvene city council at 9:40 and anything else for the good of the order. We are adjourned. Thank you everybody.