City Council - Regular Meeting

One. Good evening, Camby. Welcome to our 04/15/2026 work session this evening. Tonight, we're having a discussion with Barry Elsner and Hammond LLP regarding legal services and just some discussion on process and work done and what may be coming up here in the future. So it's kind of just so for those of you that don't know, the general public, so we contract with Barry Ehlersner and Hammond as our legal services for the city. Most importantly for us as a city council to make sure that we are abiding by all those things that we need to abide by and in loose terms,

keep our butts out of hot water.

And so tonight we're just having a conversation, I think, with some specific questions I think that counselors have. And were those given to you guys or did who collect did we have any initial questions that came out? No? Okay. So I guess I'll get things going in terms of looking at, I think, the job that your firm does, I think, in specific to Emily, has been I've had no issues with Emily.

I work very, very well with Emily and with you guys as our law firm. So I appreciate all that you guys have done and and helping us even now in the greater scope, but even previously is kind of like backup in in some areas that we have had. So that's, I mean, just kinda kicking the ball off there. So, councilor Patton, did you have any comments or questions for

The good of the order, I guess? Yeah. No, I I agree, you know, that I think with everything that has happened in the last several months that we have been very well represented. I will say that in the back of my mind continues to sit back when we had this original conversation about do we go with an in house attorney, or do we go with a firm and contract everything out? I made it very clear that as long as because it was essentially told it was pitched to me that by doing this method, the city would save money and have more specialized representation.

And I made it very clear that when that table turns and if more is being spent for the service than there is if we actually had an in house city attorney that I would start to ring bells, and that has happened very quickly. I understand that there was extenuating circumstances that led to all of that, so I can, you know, I can sit continue to sit on the fence and kinda watch things. But in my opinion, as time goes on, if these fees if this still ends up being higher, I will be an advocate for for evaluating either having a full time city attorney in house or a city attorney in house to handle our day to day stuff with support from Merrill's Nor Hammond or some other firm such as that for specialized services. So that's kinda where I'm at with all

of that. K. Councilor president Hingley, anything?

I'm still doing things I'm thinking. So go ahead, I'm sure, to councilor Davis and Sterns and

Okay. We'll come back

to you.

As well. Thank you.

K. Councilor Davis.

So thanks for coming in tonight. I'd like to start off by just asking Emily what you feel has gone well this year since you've been with us. What? How long now?

It's been a little over a year, I think. Was it October '24 that we came on as full time?

Yeah. So I'd like to kinda hear from you as far as what you you felt has gone well in areas that you you think your firm could have improved?

That's a great question. So, things that have gone well, I think we've built a good relationship with staff, particularly. You know, most of our day to day interactions, me and all the other attorneys at my firm are with staff. You you guys see me maybe twice a month for a few hours, which is great. But with staff, I think we've done a lot of good work with them, particularly with council.

I think, you know, it is expensive for you to bring me in or or one of us in to sit at council meetings each time or a lot of the times. I think there has been value there as things have come up during certain council meetings. So, you know, my ability to help steer back on track things that may have gone off of it during council meetings, I think has been a value to the city. Things that could have gone better. I will say communication is always something that everyone can improve upon.

Timeliness of communication with staff, of course. It's no one's ever perfect in that area and I I know that it's important for the client to hear from their attorneys as frequently as possible. With counsel, I would say probably communication as well. You know, as counselor Patton mentioned, there have been a few large situations for a counsel to navigate. I think it may have been new to a lot of counselors. It was also new to me in scope. And so I've, you know, walked away from how I worked with each of you and the council as a whole in those situations with a little bit better understanding of how to communicate next time. Does that answer your question?

Doctor. Yeah. Okay. You know, I think for the most part we've enjoyed the working relationship with you and with various. You know and so like all areas you know I think there's been a lot of strengths in regards to some of the work that has been accomplished.

There's been some areas where I can cite the urban renewal side of things where there were some differences between staff and yourself in regards to urban renewal when we were in that topic of discussion. I would only ask that when because you're new to this, you know, you don't have know, to municipal to this type of work and you've got a lot of associates that you can turn to and or if you don't have that expertise, bringing in those associates to deal with that topic that we're dealing with that night, you know, because you're going to in some of these areas, you're going to have to learn, right? And they might have already gone through the process, and especially as it relates to urban renewal and some of those topics. So perhaps as we get into a subject that there's some expertise in the firm that we can bring in to handle that particular topic and or that you spend a lot of time with that individual that has that expertise so that we don't stumble as we did in a couple meetings in regards to conflict with the staff in regards to recommendations and specifically around urban renewal.

I will push back slightly on that. So I I recognize I've been a lawyer for four years. All four of those years has been spent doing this type of law, but four years is the blink of an eye in the grand scheme of things. Mhmm. And one of the big strengths of Barry Eelzner and Hammond is exactly as you said, counselor Davis.

There is a wealth of knowledge and experience to draw upon. I'm a very risk averse person. I think I'm one of the more risk averse attorneys that are firm too. And so when I do encounter situations like you described where, you know, urban renewal is not something I've been doing for ten years, I do bring in a partner or someone who has more experience. So that's what I what happened with the urban renewal questions that, you know, the council or the urban renewal agency was navigating at that time.

Mhmm. The incident that you mentioned at the urban renewal meeting where there was, you know, a difference of opinion between staff and me about what next steps were. And then I can't remember who it was, but someone from the fire district, you know, spoke up and and voiced an opinion on the matter too. I chalk that up to me not communicating with staff well enough what the options were so that staff could then communicate it all appropriately to you. Because it is a very complex Mhmm. Topic as, you know, Jamie's done an excellent job navigating through that. So I would say in that situation, if I could just disagree and say I did work with people who knew more than I did, My error was not making sure staff understood, the law in that regard.

That's yeah. That's fair. Yeah. That's fair. I know that we have received the the cost increase from the firm and of course we budgeted a certain amount and rightfully so we had a lot of unforeseen investigations and things like that that put us out of whack with the budget and things like that.

With a tight budget and now that we have yet another cost increase, we're going to have to really zero in on how much we spend on attorneys because our budgets are going to be extremely tight. I was disappointed to see a cost increase coming from the firm, especially with the amount of money we've already paid out to the firm. You know. But like everything, we expect costs to go up. We're also going to then have to cut back on how much, to me, how much we actually use on attorneys.

That's understandable. And I'll pass it to Chad to talk about the cost increase in just a moment. But I do want to make sure that it's clear to counsel that we are always happy to talk about cost saving measures. We've done a little bit in the past. For example, having someone attend every council meeting, perhaps not necessary.

Council has the ability to excuse someone when it's not necessary, and then one of the charter amendments we're looking at is making it more simplified to excuse people. You've got great new staff in who have their feet under them at this point. So where perhaps they have leaned on our firm a little bit more heavily as they're getting up to speed, it's not happening anymore. One of your major costs this fiscal last fiscal year, I think, yes, last fiscal year was that you had two contracts, two collective bargaining agreements that need to be bargained, and you used me as your lead negotiator at the table. So that is a lot of time

Oh, yeah.

Of me sitting in front of both Right. Your police association and ask me to get those done. So and as you mentioned, there are. So so all that to say, there are things that you can adjust to make sure that your legal needs are met within your services. And then

I apologize if

you have comment.

Thank you.

Just glad you didn't slap my hand. Counsel, my name is Chad Jacobs. I we've met via Zoom, but it's nice to see you all in person. Just one quick point on cost savings. I'm not charging you for tonight. I'm just here to support Emily and help you with your executive session. We were kinda wondering about So you're already saving money. But it but in all seriousness, our firm, you know, was founded with the idea of providing a city attorney's office for smaller cities and we take that obligation very seriously. It's the only thing that we do is represent local governments and when we look at cost increases, we only do it every two years and we we take that very seriously. We were very reluctant to raise costs.

There's just a lot of factors that were outlined in that letter that sort of demonstrated why we really need to raise costs this time around. And we do try to keep that as minimal as possible. And I just wanna reiterate some of the things that Emily said, but go into a little bit more detail as far as costs are concerned. Is it one of the benefits that I think you'll begin to see as you move past some of those issues that you had to work through the last year? So, you know, when you're when you talk about paying our firm those legal costs, most of those costs were pass through costs. So, like, you know, before hiring an investigator, we don't take any there's no, like, we're not like other firms where we, take an administrative fee on the top of that. We just take their bill, pass it on to you, pay them directly. Right. We don't make any money off of that. So, that's not money that that was necessarily coming to our firm.

But but the point that I wanted to make is that what our firm does in in representing lots of local communities is that we pull those resources. And so when one of your neighboring communities is already working on an issue that's likely to come before the city of Campey because most cities deal with the same thing. You're not starting from square one with a lawyer. Emily will talk to other lawyers in our office and say, hey, who's dealt with this particular issue? And we've likely have a memo, we likely have a draft ordinance, we have other sorts of things, And that sort of shared cost savings amongst our clients really helps drive down costs.

So there are specific things like collective bargaining or some of the investigations that you all had to go through that are specific to Canby. But I think as you stay with the firm longer term, you'll see a lot of those cost savings. And we're happy to work with you on other ideas such as not coming to sit at city council meetings. For example, I'm the primary attorney in our office for the city of Hillsborough, which is one of the largest cities in the state. I probably go to 40% of their meetings, you know, because they just you know, we look at the agenda, we say, is there anything on here that, know, you really need an attorney for? And if not, then it's not really worth the legal budget having me attend there. Mhmm. And so I think once, you know, cities like Hillsborough can do that, cities like Canby can certainly do so Sure. As well, especially with the talented staff that you have.

Yeah.

So long winded way of saying, you know, we're more than happy to work with you. And then, you know, if it turns out that, you know, in house is a better fit, that's fine as well. You know, what we really want is what's best for the city, and that's sort of what that's our mentality. You know, we do this not because we're every lawyer you know, Emily is one of the most talented lawyers I've ever worked with. She's really, really smart, and I'll take credit for that because I was one of her law professors.

But but that's why I recruited her, you know, to come to our firm. And we're we're blessed to have her, and we're thankful for her every day. And as she continues to grow, she's gonna save the city money as well. But, you know, the the point is, like, Emily could be at a big firm making a lot more money than what we pay her. So could all the other lawyers in our office. But we do this because what we really care about is, like, the public service aspect of what we're doing. And so I I I'm honest when I say this. Like, we as a firm want what's best for the city, and we're happy to work with you in doing the analysis of, like, what makes the most sense. There are some cities where being in house, having in house counsel does make more sense. There's a lot of cities where it doesn't make sense, and it's a lot more expensive to do so.

Mhmm. And, you know, what's right for Canby may not be right for another city. And so, you know, we're happy to work with you all on all those issues and analyze those and know that they're coming from a place of of wanting to do what's best for the city and not wanting to sort of look at our, like, financial lining our financial pockets because that's that's not why we're here. If we if we wanna do that, trust me, we'd be at one of these big firms in Downtown Portland working for corporations as opposed to cities like Canby.

I just wanted to end it by saying I've been very happy with, for the most part, everything that Emily has done for the city. She's done a remarkable job and in some very tough situations too. Thank you, Emily, for the job that you have done. I, for one, I like having a contract attorney firm rather than have our own attorney because you know, when we have our own attorney, I know many times that person has to go to a law firm to that we then pay money out to get the right answer or they don't have the expertise that your firm brings to the table. So thanks for the work.

Thank you.

Yeah. I was also in general in favor of having the outside law firm because there's a depth of expertise that can be there that one person can't know everything. So I appreciate that. I have a couple of things I just wanted to air out in front of the counsel, as a counsel, that maybe some of the frustrations that I've experienced. And a little background, I do some legal ish work myself.

And I so I have a a different perspective. For me, I almost would rather have the attorney here at all the meetings because I found that having a good legal advice upfront actually usually saves money, rather than costs money. And, just the other day, somebody cost him about $20,000 because they were as a quick $300 meeting with me would have saved them, you know, and I just said, you know, this is not. And so I understand that concept that legal assistance is much cheaper in the beginning than it is at the end. One of the things that kind of concerns me, is actually this meeting itself.

We're, apparently, if we had an in house attorney, we could meet, we could, talk about some of those legal issues in executive session. But with a firm, like yours, we can't. And so that sort of inhibits some of the topics of conversation that could be had. And I don't know if there's a way of working around that or being able to talk about some some of the legal issues in in the context of things that happen in executive session that we can't talk about, so to speak. So we have to talk about what we can't talk about kind of thing.

It opens open session. So that's that's one of the obstacles that originally brought to my attention. And and for me, I always like I said, I believe having an attorney, you use it. Not the the worst thing is just have an attorney not use it. And if we're not able to communicate, then that that could cause an issue.

The other thing that I, and Emily mentioned this earlier is that, and I've it's her or the firm itself seems to me to be extremely risk averse, almost to the point where I'm joking to people that it seems like your firm represents Odek rather than rep represents the city. I I know ODEC has positions and and things. And from my point of view, since I regularly see in my not in front of ODEC, but from from the Oregon Department of Revenue, for example, They get you their opinion and we say, that's nice, but we won't listen to it. Because there's disagreement on what the law is and, you know, we take it to the court. We have procedures that we do to resolve those issues, but it almost seems as if the the position of firm is never cross eyes, you know, with anybody at ODEC.

And some of the issues that I think that have been brought up seem to be kinda rather petty, especially like the meal issue where it seems like a lot of work was doing is something that if they're gonna persecute me for eating a sandwich, I would have been happy to go from ODEC with the sandwich that I that I got from the city. And I've actually done that as a legal I mean, it's not a legal tact, but where I've gotten the state to back down just by threat of embarrassing them. And they backed down for that reason only when they were being overly petty. And so what I would like to see is personally, and I don't know what the rest of the council feels about it, is instead of saying, no. You can't do this or can't do this.

Just something like, you could if you you you can do this, but there is the risk. And the risk, my understanding talking to a lot of people, even some people who are attorneys with other jurisdictions and stuff that ODEC isn't it's got more bark sometimes than bite. My understanding is that is basically I'm on the hook for up to $5,000 for a fine. But in my firm, if somebody came to me with a $5,000 fine, I'd say that's not even enough that we would even would even suggest that you've that you'd fight that. It's it's not big compared to what I'm used to doing.

So I was just wondering what, just wanted that feedback about. And and one of the big issues that comes out is I feel like when the city attorney tells us we can't talk about this, first thing that happens is we talk about it outside. So the open meeting laws are there to make sure everything's out in the open. But because of the way that this whole threat of serial meetings work and all that stuff is that the conversations happen, but they but they can't be can't be disclosed. And so it makes it worse.

The whole idea of open meeting law is actually being thwarted because of the aggressive interpretation of the open meeting laws. So I don't know if you wanna address that or not, but that's kind of my what was was my kind of frustration. I I think I brought that up to Emily in private, but I thought it'd be good to do it in front of the councils, see what the other councils maybe. The other ones are very are more councils are more risk averse than I am, but for me, I'm just what happened all the time. Disagree with the state and sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

First, let me premise these comments with I couldn't agree with you more about OGEC. You know, our firm is routinely fighting with OGEC about their interpretations. We spent a lot of time doing pro bono work this last legislative session with LOC to get the food and beverage issue fixed, to work on the serial meeting issue, which the governor's outright to veto. You know, thousands and thousands of dollars of pro bono time that we spent working on those issues for the exact same reason that you're talking about. I think the big difference between OGEC and, like, working with DOR or other state agencies is twofold.

One is when you think about us as a lawyer, our client is the city as an entity. And you as the council acting as a body is one of the constituent parts of the city as an entity. So is Randy as the city administrator, so are other staff members who have authority to do things, but we represent the city as an entity. When OGAC goes after you all for violating these laws, they go after you personally. So we don't represent you in that.

Matter of fact, OGAC, in one of their interpretations, has said that that would be a violation of the ethics laws if we were to represent you before OGAC. And so it's a very difficult line for us knowing that, you know, well, we represent the city as an entity. If we are giving you advice to say go ahead and do something, that could potentially cause personal liability for you. And so that's why with OGEC, we take a pretty conservative approach. And we have always done that because it's not really fair to US individuals to say, yeah, I'm comfortable being subject to a $5,000 fine for these volunteer activities, you know, being an elected official for the city of Canby.

Now, that may be absolutely you may be comfortable with that, but, you know, we as as an office with OGAC don't really sort of take that position because not everyone is comfortable with that. So we're we're gonna be pretty strict and conservative when it comes to OGAC. Now, for almost every other situation where you don't have personal liability, where it's really the city and you're making the decision on behalf of the city, our job is to just outline those risks for you like you said. And that really is what our goal is. And if if you think that we need to if we're not doing a good enough job and saying, like, okay, here's the risk and here's your options, you know, that's absolutely something we can continue to work on.

And, you know, as the partners will work with Emily and our other lawyers to make sure that we're doing that. But that's sort of what our mentality is is that you all are the decision makers, and we're just here to sort of outline the risk. So you're making those decisions with your eyes wide open. You know, that's all we wanna see happen. OGEC is just this weird animal because they do take such aggressive and what I would call somewhat absurd positions and because it creates personal liability for each of you as individuals that we just have to take a conservative approach.

And that's just sort of what we do, and you all can take that with a grain of salt. You can say, this is absurd, and I'm gonna eat this sandwich, I don't really care. And if you get called before OGEC, well, we've we've let you make that decision with your eyes wide open or with your mouth wide open, whatever you wanna call it. But but at the end of the day, that's that's really why with OGEC, we take that really conservative position. And and, you know, I get it. And I I more than feel your frustration because I spent a lot of time arguing with with OGEC staff and DOJ lawyers over their interpretation of these ethics laws, which, frankly, like the food and beverage thing is, in my personal opinion, one of the most absurd things that I've seen come out of a state agency in a long time.

Well, I've had experience bringing absurd things. I even got a de minimis exception from one of the judge where legally there isn't any because the DOR was being so absurd that And so I understand that the law is a law, but sometimes Yeah. There's everybody has

And I was

where it's like, no, you know, if you're going a half a mile per hour over the speed limit, it's it's not a

Absolutely. And I will say that, you know, a lot of this stems from a change in the executive director at OGAC. The previous executive director, I think, was much more reasonable in his approach. You know, the law was the law with him, but but if you look at some of the older opinions, like, they they, you know, looked at things in a more rational and reasonable way and sort of looked at the real world impacts. The current executive director just is not like that. And I don't know why that's her mentality, but she is definitely one person who takes a very expansive view of the law regardless of whether it's bound in the actual law itself or not. And so it's, you know, it's created a lot of problems for our local elected officials, for LOC, for state elected officials, but, you know, it's the system we're stuck with.

Is there I just started I don't wanna monopolize this, but is there any has has your firm done any legal pushback against some of these absurd things? Or A

lot a lot of legal pushback.

Like Because

lot of time.

And My experience with state agencies, I've dealt with more than one is Yeah. They do what they want until somebody tells them no. Yep. But if no one tells them no, they will push it as far as as Yeah. As they can.

And honestly, part of the problem is is that when like I said, when it gets to the point where it's actually before OGAC, we're no longer allowed to represent folks. And so,

you know,

we're not in that process and a lot of people don't wanna pay out of pocket for a lawyer to represent them when they know that, okay, well, all we got is to offer me a letter of education if I just agree to a settlement agreement. So I'll take the settlement agreement because I don't have to pay anything, get my letter of education, which is basically like a slap on the rip, public slap on the wrist, and be able to move on. And so a lot of these issues don't go to those, like, contested case hearings and other sorts of things that you may see with other agencies where people are willing to pay a lawyer to sort of fight that issue. It just doesn't happen very often.

Okay. One more thing just not related to that, but one thing I would was a little bit concerned me a little bit it was it was some of the extra legal work that was done this this last year with some costs on that. And generally, you know, in my firm when we engage somebody and it turns out the cost is gonna be higher than originally, what was thought of, we usually bring in the client and explain to them that the work is increased and this is gonna be higher cost and and the and here's a and you wanna con proceed or not proceed with the with the engagement. And, you know, and I don't know that that as a council, we got that sort of communication that said something to the fact that this is bigger and we think it should go on, but here's the cost and, you know, let you make the decision on it or what the cost potential would be. And so that was one of the things that that was a little bit

But can you clarify which was that like

Well, mean

or what is what is your what are your

I have

to be very general because of what I said in my first thing, but it was a particular Can't

talk about what we can't

That's the frustrating thing about this. Can't talk about what we can't talk about. But there are there are instances where a particular thing that the council authorized became more expensive or became expensive and we talked about some of those fees being passed through on that. But it but it's usually nice to to know to be let know that the thing that we're doing became more expensive than

I think I can do that. I think the easier way to say this without saying details is there were some, as you mentioned earlier, investigations that we had to do and things.

Yeah. Okay.

I do not recall the council ever being apprised of what the rate for those investigators was going to be.

Or the potential Or the potential. Like the bill is going up higher. So, like, when my clients, if the all of sudden, the bill is going up higher because there's a whole lot more work, we're like, okay, let's stop and let's bring them and make sure the client is is is aware of the cost.

Yeah. This this staff that's good feedback. The staff member who authorized costs in those situations was informed of, like, rates before we moved forward with engaging the contractors. So, you know, if future situations arise, think that's good feedback for us all that you want a closer eye on.

Not just the rates, but, oh, now the hours are are better. That looks like they're gonna take a lot more hours than, you know, we try to at least open up the when I when I talk to my clients, I say this is what the potential cost could be. Then when it you know, we try to keep it, reasonable. But then when we all all know it's gonna be a lot higher, we always make sure we pause and bring them in because we because it's good to to have the the to know for us as a council to know, hey. This could be a higher cost that we still wanna proceed with with what was we originally authorized.

No. I I agree with you, councilor Sterns, and the authorization. If I believe I understand who the staff member was, only had a $50,000 signing authority, so it should have come before us. So we at

least knew what was going on.

So sorry if that's vague, but that's one of the reasons why I would like to find a way to get around the whole thing about we could only talk about generalities in in in the in this this work session.

So Comments, questions.

That's a that was that was my list.

Okay. Councillor Wattenberg.

I just wanted to say I don't I appreciate everything you guys do. I appreciate the stance that you guys take and the work that you do in the community. I personally don't remember us ever being told by you that we couldn't do something. We've always been said. I think the words have always been, we highly recommend that this is the course of action or etcetera.

It's always a recommendation. We always have it upon ourselves to choose to do or not do what your recommendations are and I personally don't feel like eating a $5,000 sandwich. So, I appreciate the knowing what the baseline of the risk averse part is and again, we could always make a choice to do something different, but that's not like you said on us. I think for one of the things I would like to see going forward, especially with the changes in the pricing, this is more of a staff thing as well too, is that forecasting part of understanding based on if you're here 40% of the time or so because we're going to have a budget to make sure that we really understand what services we can get within the budget that we're that we plan to propose and options of of that to to make sure that, you know, back to whether we're gonna go outside or not because we can go outside and maybe it seems cheaper at first, but then, like mentioned, but then there's additional work that still has to go on with that and it's still probably, you know, is it cheaper to just stay with just the outside counsel?

And I think that's probably a staff thing that would sort of a forecasting investigation on what that would look like so that we could see that for budget. Maybe I've already done that. Again, I appreciate all the work you've done with us and and for us. So, that's all I have for right now. Thanks.

Councilor Patten?

We talked about a little bit of it. Thanks to councilor Sperman's bringing something up. I do appreciate the depth of bench, I do agree with you pushing back on okay. I'm glad I'm glad to hear you say that you think that their overreach is ridiculous. So I'm glad to hear that, and I hope that you'll continue to fight the ridiculousness. I'm disappointed to know that that that that position is actually appointed by the commissioners. Right? I have to have a talk with somebody. Anyway, so that's unfortunate that that they've hired someone who's made some weird changes. That's another issue, though.

I'm not sure how I wanna say what I wanna say, so maybe move on and come back to me. I also would like to hear, what Randy's thoughts are on the day to day work relationship as well. Okay. But, yeah, I'll I'll noodle my thought and then

We'll go to

councilor Patton and then our planning, committee chair is on Zoom, so I wanna give him an opportunity as well.

Yeah. So I just wanna touch on a few things that have been kinda mentioned up here. One is and and, again, this is my understanding of the situation. This touches on something that you had said, councilor Sterns. Whether we are trying to have this conversation with a firm, outside firm, or inside counsel, if we want to have a conversation during executive session, it has to adhere to a strict regiment of rules.

So even one of one of the things that drove this conversation to an open session was because we weren't able to really nail down the specific questions that were going to be asked and weren't able to tie those questions to a particular OR statute to be able to have that conversation under executive session. That would be the case whether it's these folks here or internal counsel. And that rule applies for when we have our reviews of our city administrator and of the judge. And so I just wanna make clear I just wanna make sure that my understanding is clear that even if we were trying to have this conversation in this way with an inside legal counsel, we would still essentially

And then that individual then has the right to require you to do it in open session if they want you to do it in open session. But if that doesn't happen, you can go into exec.

Yes. But during in that in the preparation for that meeting, we have to at least give them some understanding of what is gonna be covered in that conversation. Correct? We can't just call them in here and then say, we're gonna do a performance evaluation, but then all of a sudden, we're gonna talk about this other thing.

Well, you you can you don't have to give them advanced notice of what you're going to talk about, but it has to relate to their performance. So Sure. Emily was just saying, you can't start talking about other issues that's unrelated to their performance by using that exemption. Okay. Because then you're sort of going beyond the scope of the what the executive session provisions allow.

So I I I would I would say that you are, like, 40% correct in your original analysis because because you're right. There are certain topics that even under the umbrella of a performance evaluation that you're just not gonna be able to talk about in an executive session under that exemption. There may be other provisions such as, you know, an exempt public record if we're get receiving a attorney client privilege advice that you could rely on. So if there are specific things that that you all want to talk to our office about that sort of could relate to one of these other provisions, you know, let us know, and we can talk about that and analyze that specific issue. I think the difficult thing is just to go under this umbrella of a performance evaluation and say, hey.

We're gonna talk about all these things because even in that context, you are limited to talking about that individual's performance as opposed to sort of, like, how the city is doing on this particular issue or what the city is doing, you know, about a particular topic.

Okay. And and how this kinda ties into this is, you know, when within, I would say, probably three or four weeks of joining counsel three years ago, I was involved, like several of you, in violations of

Why is he analytic?

Of this stuff. And it was a very hard lesson to learn. I don't have a lot of money to be putting towards me deciding I wanna shoot from the hip and push the boundaries of OGEC. Right? And so, therefore, I appreciate the fact that you folks keep us in line.

I have also I also wanna just say that councilor Sterns had mentioned about different things. I wanna go on record as saying I were I learned a lot from that experience, and I worked very hard to make sure to stay in my lane and not have meetings outside with, you know, a majority of counselors and stuff. So if people are listening to this, I work very hard to make sure that I don't do that because I don't want that hanging over my head. It's already been hung over it once before. I don't want it to happen again.

A couple of things that and I think actually when I started down that path, because I did not understand anything about it, your firm was actually the firm I first reached out to to get an understanding of just what I had gotten myself into. And I don't think it was you, Emily. I think it might have been the other Emily that I was connected with that said, we can't represent you. We can't answer any of your questions because we represent cities and for and and and municipalities and stuff, and they at least gave me a contact information for somebody who could possibly help me in this situation. So, you know, kudos to you folks for that.

Now as far as a couple of things that I've teased out from this conversation, I think and this is some notes for staff. When we know that we're gonna have contract negotiations with the unions and stuff come up. We need to make sure that as we are doing our long term strategic planning within our budget, that we plan for the legal fees for that year to be higher and make sure to build that into the budget so that that way, instead of just saying each year it's about this amount, we have a trigger there to say we know that there's gonna be a higher amount of legal fees because of contract negotiations. So therefore, we need to make sure that we budget more in that budget cycle for So I think that is something important as we move forward. And something else that I've learned from this process that I hope, you know, that we do in the future is that if there is some sort of investigation or something like that or a project that is gonna take more time or require some sort of outside information, that we as a council set the understanding of the guidelines to say, we wanna see how much such a thing could cost, and we and this is how much we're prepared to spend on it.

And then if we start to get to that limit, then we need to be included in the conversation about how much more is it gonna be and those sort of things. It's really on us to set the limit as the stewards of the city's budget, and I think that is something that at least I've learned through this whole process that we've gone through the last couple of years.

Thank you, sir. Planning chair Ellison, did you have any comments or feedback for Barry Elder and Hammond?

You're still muted, sir.

He may not be there. Okay. If he comes back we'll clue him in. Randy, it's Council President Hensley passed to, I mean, how has been the working relationship with staff in Barry Eisner and Hammond?

It's been a great journey. First, full disclosure, I think Chad and I have known each other for over thirty years maybe early late nineties when he was with the league. So I appreciate it's come full circle and I think can be is very fortunate to have Barry Ellsner as legal counsel. They work with a lot of my colleagues in other cities in Oregon do just an outstanding job. In fact, we're working on a share with Happy Valley.

I've been talking to Ben and Steve over there and they said that you're working on a ebike ordinance and that's come up over here too. Maybe there's some economies of scale that Chad mentioned earlier because they're working on similar issues in other cities that we were facing here as well. So that is a bonus. There may be a little bit of, you know, they report directly to you. I report directly to you, so those are swim lanes.

But Emily and I consult often, almost daily. So there that's been a pivot because the city before my time, you used to have an in house attorney, Joe, I think was his name, and department head staff could just walk down the hallway and have a chat with Joe about anything. And trust me, every day there are legal questions that come up about any decisions we're making. So we have to decide, do we need to engage the firm or not? It's a risk analysis we're taking as a leadership team.

And so I have put out the mandate that nobody calls the firm until they talk to me first because of what we just went through. And so hopeful hopeful to get sort of our arms around. Now, that creates a problem, frankly, because, you know, there's deadlines and timelines and my directors who are here tonight are faced with trying to move projects to get projects built because they only get more expensive the longer they take. They're trying to get RFPs on the street. And so if I'm second guessing why they wanna talk to legal, it slows things down, where they could just, in the past, walk down to Joe's office.

I use air quote Joe, not talking about anybody in particular. So you can see the the dilemma, and, we recently eased up on that restriction a little bit, because turbulent waters have passed, and we have more capacity, more budget to engage on some very highly technical. So we're leaning on their deep bench. So if Emily maybe perhaps doesn't exactly know the answer right away, she can phone a friend in the firm. Right?

And that's been that's been helpful. So that's sort of the art of the partnership you know it's different for me even in my previous city there were Chad was five in house attorneys in Beaverton and Yeah. Fully paid in in house. But we still had to contract out

for Yeah.

Issues that came up. So I'm happy to take a look at part time or in house, but I'm here to say that nine times out of 10, we're gonna have a situation or a unicorn come up where we're gonna need to reach out to somebody like the firm for expertise. Right? Mhmm. Not I'm not sure anything that you haven't already thought of or faced.

But overall, I appreciate the relationship and we're growing together. And I appreciate the counsel Emily's provided, and I'm glad that we're beyond what we started with. I owe a lot to of that to this firm and, the contracted folks that worked on it as well. Anything else you'd like me to add?

No. That was perfect. Thank you. Council president Inslee.

Thank you, mister Marion. Thank you, Randy, for those comments. That actually helps me out a little bit because, first, I wanna address the money saved and money spent. When we first went to the firm model versus in house model, we were saving a ton of money.

Yeah.

And then all hell broke loose. Pardon my French. And the costs of those things that were going on weren't fully disclosed what that was going to cost us up front, and it just kinda spiraled out of control. Also and I don't feel I feel like that we're we're beyond that, and and, also the current leadership is gonna be picking up the phone at every turn.

Right.

Like, you know, it's it's nice to to know that there's can be decisions made in the corner office without having to pick up the phone. So that's nice to know as well. So I I would there was a time I was feeling like the current representation might have been a little too involved and in in the chaos and maybe had some predetermined, notions or biases. So I am kind of, like, reserving now to see now that the dust has settled and we have new leadership, and I just kinda wanna watch and see how that part goes from here on out before I before I raise that flag again. I do think that in the past with the that was brought up about the negotiations with the unions.

In the past, we had the HR director do those negotiations, and then legal gave it a look see at the end. So it's like, here's the contract that you know, what do you think rather than being the actual chief negotiator. So that could be a cost savings if we go back to that model because that is what she did. Right? And then, yeah, that's what I thought.

Thank you, Brian mayor. So I I would like to see us revisit that model and see if we can save some money there because I know that being involved in those meetings that are hours and hours long must cost you a lot of your patience and a lot of our money. So, we wanna address that. I think that covers the things that I have put in my notes for right now. So but yeah.

No. Overall, there's been I I have appreciated the depth of bench for that's my main thing. It's like, you no one person knows everything, and it's nice to know that, well, this question, Emily can't answer. Maybe even Chad couldn't answer, but maybe Ashley could. You know, I I like having those options. That is something that having a multiple person firm versus one person in house that would have to end up reaching out anyway. That's helpful. So thank you.

That's all for

right now.

Okay. Emily, Chad, any feedback for us?

Not really.

I can do better differently, good, bad, indifferent?

I enjoy working for you. I it's a pleasure to come to council meetings. I like you all as individuals. I really like your staff. You've got a great staff, director level all the way down. It's been fun.

I think the biggest takeaway is communication. Say that again. I think our biggest takeaway for all of us is communication.

That isn't not the truth for everything. Mhmm. Yeah.

Well, we do like to keep it entertaining here at Kansas City Council. So, okay. If there's no other comments from the council or from you all, We are going to

We'd have to be abstain.

Should we just double check with Matt to see if

he has He's on the I think he's on the comp plan

Yeah. Public hearing that we have later.

Oh, okay. Oh, so he's trying to double duty here?

Well, I'm I think I since he was here, because I know that Oh, okay. Because you

all He logged in too early for the other thing.

You often help with the planning commission meetings as well, do you not?

I have never had the pleasure Okay. Dugil may have at certain times or Josh Soper. Okay. So if mister Ellison has things to share, we can pass him along, certainly.

Well, I think he went on hiatus until our public hearing. So

Yeah. It looks like he just he logged in too soon. He's like, wait. This isn't me. I'm gonna have dinner.

Councilor Warman, you had something else?

And kinda like what Randy was talking about, you know, where you have to where you have to kinda gatekeep a little bit Yeah.

On it.

Is there do you kinda have a process in place where you you have sort of triggers, like, on a monthly basis? Like, if we say we're good based on our budget, we're good up to just throw a number out, like, $10,000 a month. And if you're at $8,000 based on staff reaching out to you that you're like, a ping goes out to, say, Randy that says, hey, we're here, then he maybe only has a gatekeeper for a week instead of all, you know, the the whole time. Is it do have kind of a process like that in place?

We do you know better than I do. See?

Yeah. We we do have it's a funny so our firm does a lot of what this is general counsel work, and then we get hired as special counsel. So if, like, a city has an in house city attorney and they need specialized assistance, come to us. And and for a lot of those specialized work, we have something called an NT not to exceed amount, and so there we we track that. We can certainly try to implement something like you're talking about.

You can talk to our office manager to see if our software allows us to do that. The the and I just wanna be clear that it will not be perfect. It's it's based on part of it's based on when people input their time into the system, and then part of it's just like, as you as you know, it could be directly quiet for two weeks, you know, almost no bills, and all of a sudden an issue blows up. And all of a sudden, all of Emily's time is spent completely on Cambie. So, you know, sort of, you know, saying that, like, okay. We're towards the end of the month. Everything's fine. And then it blows up and also we're not fine. And so that's why I just wanna be clear that, like, we'll absolutely try to work with Rainey to put some sort of a system in place if you guys want, but I don't wanna promise that it'll be perfect.

Yeah. I'm just trying

to think of a way to to free up his time, not not hamper our staff, but also give us a little bit of control.

Yeah. And I would also just say that, you know, it'll be interesting to see now that the dust has settled, so to speak, you know, how this all sort of starts playing out. If things become more normalized, that may be less of a burden for Randy than it's been over the last several months.

Thank you. Council president Hensley, and then I'll

call back. Thank you. There was one more thing on my notes that I just read past, and that was the charter change that we that you had mentioned, Emily, that about the excusing folks. It is in our charter that we have the city attorney attend every meeting unless we excused that attorney from the meeting. So, like, a couple weeks ago, you excused the attorney.

I think we need to continue doing that till we work on the language and get that charter change passed to make that easier that process easier. Because there are meetings where there's a public hearing or some wonky new business conversation that, of course, we might want to have legal counsel present. But if we have an agenda full of second readings and a proclamation, stay home, have some popcorn, and save us a bill. And so I would like to continue down that path, and that could be a cost savings as well.

So what you could do, because the charter is inconvenient in that it says the council has to excuse. So it has to be a council action, which, you know, you do in public meetings and if I'm here already. What you could do if you're interested is just make a blanket excusal unless notified otherwise. That's funny because I actually asked

if we could do that, and I didn't get an answer. So I think it just got lost in the cracks. Remember, I said, can we just say excuse until further notice? And we weren't sure, but we could make that.

Yeah. I would actually probably do it a blanket unless city administrator feels otherwise and city administrator has

to call you in and call

him in.

Let's do that, folks. That's I'm gonna propose that in the real business meeting.

There you go.

Let's make a motion.

Okay. Councilor Stearns. Just two

things real quick. One is I just did this other counselors here. Even though the rates went up a little bit, me working in that field, those are pretty reasonable rates for attorneys. You get a lot more expensive than that pretty without going too far away. So I just wanna say that I think your your fees are not to give you any ideas about raising them, but still they're they're but they are reasonable.

The other thing is so this is just a kind of a general legal question. So if I have a procedural question, one thing. If I have a question for the city attorney, which is Emily, And I'm not sure if she's gonna be at the meet if I she's at the meeting every night, I I know I just go ask her during my my time. But if but if she's not gonna be at the meeting, is is there a way that I can just say, I'm asking this illegal question by asking it in a public sort of way, not just not necessarily a private way. Am I gonna go to jail for eating the sandwich?

But the Email. But but I'm saying, but to say I want this this legal question answered in the council meeting, whether it be written or or verbal because if if you're not there or then then I don't know when I'm when I can ask it in a public way. I always I I can always ask sort of a private question like, is this legal or not? Let me know. But but often, I'm concerned about asking it sort of a a public. I don't if that makes sense.

Yeah. So our our clients who who use this process of sort of reviewing the agenda each time and say, is there a reason to have the city attorney there? And, you know, great example, I used to go to countless meetings where I listened to the latest Eagle Scout presentation or the local theater group doing a play. And I was sort of looking at the city council saying, do you really wanna pay me to sit here and do this? I mean, that's it's great to listen to, but it's not really worth your money. So what we do is we review the agenda with the city manager or city administrator in advance. We try to figure out are there legal issues. And then the council has a process where they notify staff in advance like, hey, I've got these questions. And a lot of times, we can just answer those questions to the city manager or city administrator who then can share that information with you on the city council meeting.

That would be the proper procedure. I would just ask them

to say

And so the only thing I would say is that you may need to review your council rules as you're going through all this to make sure that your council rules have that sort of procedure in place. But otherwise, that's what most of our clients do is they just notify staff in advance, hey, we've got this. I've got this question. And then that helps influence the decision by the city manager, city administrator to say, look, there's a lot of legal questions that the council has. We really need you here.

Or if there's only this one legal question, Emily or someone in our office answered it for you and they're comfortable, you know, sharing that information with you, then there's not really a need for us to be there. And so that's all just part of the analysis process as as they're going through the agenda packet. And honestly, just for your knowledge, the way most of us operate is we put these meetings on our calendar. So I know, for example, you know, every first and third Tuesday of the month, I've got Hillsborough on my calendar and that's reserved. And they can tell me, you know, a couple days in advance that they don't need me, and then they may call me that day and say, wait, things just blew up. We need you to come out. So we just keep that sort of locked on our calendar until we know for certain that we don't have to come, which gives you all the flexibility to say, hey, we need you or no, we don't need you.

Just kidding. Come back.

Giving Emily the gift of time.

Exactly. And that's, know, when when I've got in my mind, I've got to account got to go to a council meeting that night and they call me at 04:00 and say, never mind, don't have to come. That's great. I am not upset in the least bit.

Okay. Councilor Batten, and then we need to get into our exec session.

I have no problem with us, you know, doing a blanket waiver for regular city council meetings, but I will never approve it for executive sessions.

Oh, I wasn't insinuating that.

And so I will make sure that that is I would like to see that specific in there because I will never be in another executive session with the city that doesn't have some sort of attorney at present.

Okay. Noted. Thank you both. Appreciate it. If there's nothing else, I will end our work session. Thank you, Chad and Emily for this. Appreciate it very much. For those of you that are here for our city council meeting, we have the, I think in my fourteen years, I think we've never had this happen. We're starting at 07:00. The city council meeting will start at 07:30 because we have an exec session beforehand.

So you all get the gift of time for a moment to kibbitz, talk amongst yourself, go Thriftway, get a beverage, and we'll see you back at 07:30. I will take a motion from counsel to go to the exec session.

Oh, mister mayor, I move we go into executive session for 7ORS192Dot660 parent two parent f to consider information or records that are exempt from by law from public inspection.

Second. All those in favor? Aye.

Aye. Alright. We will

now go into executive session. We will back be back in a half hour. Thank you, Cammy.

Just a second.

Good evening, Camby. Welcome to our regular city council meeting for 04/15/2026, tax mandate. So if you haven't mailed it, there's a post office box somewhere. Okay. If you'll please stand for the invocation and the pledge of allegiance, please. Just ask for just a moment of silence for our first responders and our men and women in service and our armed forces around the world tonight. Great. Thank you. We'll do the pledge.

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 All justice for all.

Right. Theresa, roll call of the council, please.

Councilor Patton. Here. Councilor Maldonado. Here. Council president Hensley. Here. Mayor Hudson.

I am here.

Councilor Davis. Here. Councilor Stearns.

I'm here.

Councilor Waterman?

Here. Alright. We have a full group tonight. Fabulous. Randy, any staff, introductions this evening?

I do not believe so. No, sir.

Thank you. Alright. We'll move into item four, citizen input and public comment. This is an opportunity for council or sorry, for the general public to address the council on non agenda items. If you are wishing to address the council on that podium there when you walk in are these fabulous white cards that you can fill out, bring them to our deputy recorder this evening. She will make sure I get it, and then you are given your time to talk to the council. You are given three minutes. You can buy time from somebody else. We've just asked that if you can keep it at three, that would be swell. We will do our best to address the item here this evening.

If not, myself, and our, interim city administrator will get together and figure out if we can get it figured out or, or not. So, I do have a stack here. We will start with Jackie Jones with the CAMID Prevention Coalition and Michelle. Good evening.

Good evening.

And Jackie, you're selling your time to Michelle?

Yes.

Perfect. Thank you. Ms. Michelle, you are good to go.

Hello, I'm Michelle Kutniak. I am the CAMBI Prevention Coalition Coordinator and I'm here tonight to give you an update on what we've been doing and our progress. I wanna start by telling you about we did a community partner appreciation lunch and learn in March. We had about 25 community partners in attendance, some new, and we had our lunch and learn topics were we had chief Dale there to provide an update on community safety, including response time, and we learned that the campy buyer's doing really well comparatively throughout the throughout the country, it sounded like. We also had Anne Marie Polinago, who is the Campi School District student services director.

She presented on the school's new cell phone policy, which has been much stricter and requires that no phones are out at any time, and the results of that were very positive. The teachers are noting way better attention spans, the kids are reporting neutral feedback. They're not too upset about it. So, yeah, that was great. And then lastly, officer Rollers, the school resource officer over at Baker Prairie, presented on vaping and Internet safety.

So, that was our one of our big events. And then, last week over at Baker Prairie Middle School, officer Wohlers and I did a presentation for parents, parent education night, and we he did the same presentation on vaping, nicotine, and marijuana, and Internet safety, what parents need to know. And I presented on risk and protective factors that are associated with substance use and what actionable steps that parents could take to protect their kids, such as setting standards within the home, what do you approve of, what don't you approve of, and kids having opportunities to feel like they belong at school and recommending that just a lot of family communication go on. And we also provided resources that are available that parents could take right then and there. So, I like to think that the parent that came left with a lot of positive information.

Attendance was low. This was the first time we did this sort of event, but we were the school really liked what we had to provide and mentioned opportunities to continue in the future, And, we're ready to come back. We're hoping to do something in the fall. And, that also highlights our relationship with the schools has become a lot stronger. The student services director is a regular coalition member now and has done a lot for us in terms of helping us plan events and getting the word out in the school newsletter and among schools and helping coordinate with the school principals, etcetera.

So, that's been great. Oh, also, we had a Spanish version of the presentation too, and that was put on by Totos Juntos, Fatima Lopez, and Anthony Cervantes, who are in the school prevention specialists available to help. So I just wanna make sure and give them some credit for that. Lastly, on the horizon, there's lots of summer events where we're gonna be promoting substance use education for parents, resources for parents, bridging cultures in town, is putting on four Saturdays in the Park. So, we plan to be at a couple of those, as well as a Thursday Thursday night market.

And, yeah, we just wanted to kinda come here and just let you know what we've been doing. We've been busy and we hope to keep the momentum going, and we hope to see you at some of those summer events. Thank you.

No. Thank you very much for the update. I know you guys the group has grown and and there's a lot of work being done, so thank you both for the hard work and getting promoted for promoting in the group throughout the schools and with parents because it is a big deal. And I will say I do appreciate the new cell phone rules at the at the schools. My son who's a junior has been busted twice. So Cell phone jail. Yes. He's pretty close to being in cell phone jail, which I would not be opposed to. I think it would do him some good. Oh, see. See. So thank you both very much for all the hard work that that group is doing here in Camby. So thank you.

Thank you for your continued support as well to all of you.

Oh, absolutely. It's been great.

I would like to say officer Wohlers

is absolutely amazing.

Yes. I've worked with him on numerous days.

Officer Wohlers is amazing there. We we said that out loud. I've worked with him on a couple occasions, and as far as the the vaping and the Internet safety is concerned, him and I have gone back and forth on that quite a few times about different ideas of what we can do. So I I love to see that this is actually moving forward.

Mhmm. He's a great partner to have.

Yes. Thank you.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you. Next,

to turn on my microphone. Next, Darla Meade regarding a candidate for State Rep House District 51. Hello.

Hi. I just wanted to come by tonight, introduce myself to the council, the mayor.

If you wouldn't mind. Thank you.

Yes. Sorry.

That's okay.

So my name is Darla Mead. I'm running for House District 51 that includes CAMBI. This is the first time I've ever done this. I'm an oncology nurse at OHSU. I do navigation for lung and head and neck cancer patients.

I've worked at OHSU for almost fourteen years. It's all been in oncology. I've become very frustrated with what's happening with our health care system and with my patients consistently and even increasingly having challenges with insurance trying to get the health care they need, get it covered. I have patients that struggle with getting the care they need and or I should say they struggle with making the decision between getting the care they need and risking financial devastation for their families. Or in some cases, we have patients that are in challenging socioeconomic situations, and they really just can't even entertain the concept of trying to get cancer treatment when they're just worrying about where they're going to live and how they're going to eat.

So those motivated me to get involved in this and to try and get into Salem, see what I can do to improve that situation. That, of course, is my first priority in doing this. I wanna improve the health care system. I think one of the things that we're looking at and I actually became aware of when I got into this was that Oregon is trying to work on some sort of universal health care program. From my perspective with my patients, I'm absolutely a 100% for that.

I've seen the economic value and opportunity that that presents in helping us keep our hospitals open, potentially open more clinics in our rural communities. So, I'm hoping that that's going to have that influence as well, in addition to taking that burden off of our patients. I'm also a huge advocate of Oregon. I'm born and raised in Oregon. I grew up if you know where Clackamas Fred Meyer is, I grew up right across the other side of the freeway from that.

Being a long time Clackamas County resident, I'm very familiar with all of the changes that occurred in our community. And while I recognize that we wanna see economic growth in our communities, we also very much value these small time town communities, the feel, the charm, the uniqueness of our small towns. We don't wanna lose that. We wanna improve our towns, but we don't wanna turn them into Portland. Right? And so that is my emphasis when I'm looking at economic development and improvement. I wanna keep that at the forefront. Alright. Thank you very much. I

appreciate you your for coming in. I appreciate it. Good luck.

Thank you.

Next is Nicole Bassett, candidate for state senate in Oregon. Is there an election coming up?

I'm just kidding.

I'm just kidding.

I'm just kidding.

Is. Yeah. So good evening, everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to come here and speak with you. My name is Nicole Bassett.

I'm running for Oregon State Senate District 26, so spanning from The Dalles all the way out here to Canby. I'm a business owner, and I'm a community member in Hood River. And so the past twenty years, I've worked in a unique intersection between business and social and environmental responsibility. I led initiatives for companies like Patagonia and Prana, and I've consulted from companies all the way from Nike to Target on how do they do business in a ethical way that does not harm people or the planet in their supply chains. And I started a company in 2015 in Cascade Locks, went from an idea, dusted off a business plan, and grew the company about 45 people in Cascade Locks.

We had another facility in Amsterdam, 80 people. And so I know what it's like to start a business in a small community and create jobs. I think we're headed into some really unknown territory in the future. I know the state has been underfunded for decades, and we need people who understand how the economy works, what they implement, like, how it trickles into, it implements for business owners, and how we can respond to the moment. And so that's why I'm running for office.

In my spare time, I'm out biking and hiking. I also am a hospice volunteer. Sit with people at the end of their lives, and it's really been what's inspired me to say, like, okay. There's not much time. We gotta keep I really wanna step up and serve.

So, I wanna bring that experience and that, those skills to policy and to Salem and advocate. I grew up in a small community, rural, and I know how important it is to have that rural voice, and I think that's something that's been missing in Salem, a real strong advocate for the residents here. So I would welcome the opportunity to follow-up with any of you. I may reach out. I really wanna understand more and hear more and learn how I could be the best senator for the residents here in Camby. So thank you for your time.

Thank you for coming in. I appreciate it. Good luck. Okay. Theresa, is there anyone online this evening? Okay. The only other card I have is mister Emanuele, which is for the later agenda item with our comp plan. So I will come back to you on that one. Great. Item five, we do not have any proclamations or special presentations. Item six, I don't think there's anything to remove from the consent agenda because it's just the notes. I will take a motion to approve the consent agenda, please.

Mr. Mayor, I move to approve the consent agenda that includes the approval of the 03/11/2026 City Council Special Called Meeting and Urban Renewal Agency meeting minutes and the 03/18/2026 City Council regular meeting minutes. And I have a question after the session. Second. My question is that urban renewal agency meetings, don't the minutes, don't those have to be approved approved at the urban renewal agency meeting?

In previously, yes. We've those have been approved at just in special urban renewal agency meeting. So I

I can check on that.

So

for I think for now we should just, remove that piece and Yeah. And include the minutes for the 03/11/2026 city council special meeting and March 18 city council regular meeting. Councilor Mabonado was the second. Do you agree with the amendment?

I agree. Okay. So it's been moved by council president Hensley and seconded by councilor Maldonado to approve the consent agenda that includes the approval of the 03/11/2026 city council special called meeting and the 03/18/2026 City Council regular meeting minutes and holding over urban renewal agency meeting notes until we have further detail and or a scheduled urban renewal meeting. Any comment or question?

My only comment is I apologize for not catching that till I read it out loud. Sorry, Randy.

Fine. Feedback is welcome. All those in favor?

Aye. Anyone opposed? Alright. Carries four zero. Item eight, we have no appointments to make this evening. Item nine, ordinances and resolutions. So we're gonna first up is consider ordinance number sixteen sixty six, an ordinance authorizing the interim city administrator to enter into an agreement with Xylem Water Solutions USA to purchase four raw influent pumps, in the amount of $93,602. And it is for second reading. So, yes, councilor Patton.

So recently, we made some changes to our policies and operating guidelines. And all these second readings, as long as there wasn't a nay vote in them were essentially to be consolidated under a slate of them so that to speed things up. So I'm gonna give this a try. So strap in folks, we're gonna try something new. Awesome.

I move to approve ordinance number one six six six, an ordinance authorizing the interim city administrator to execute a contract with Xylem Water Solutions USA to purchase the four raw effluent pumps up to the amount of $93,602. Ordinance number one six six seven and Let him

do his

he's doing his motion.

Yeah. Just give me a second. I'm doing a thing. And ordinance number one six six seven, an ordinance just give me a minute. An ordinance authorizing the interim city administrator to enter into an agreement with three j Consulting regarding the UGB expansion and code audit, and ordinance number one six six eight, an ordinance authorizing the mayor to enter into an amended employment contract with the interim city administrator Randy Ealy, as a slate of ordinance approvals on second reading with a roll call vote.

I second that motion and want to explain reiterate in case people on the dais here have forgotten. If you don't agree with one of these and you want it pulled from the slate, you can do that now, or we can just do roll call vote and accounts for all of those ordinances. It's it's a time saving measure that we put into the policy. Okay.

And I totally appreciate that and understand that. And I this was a conversation that Randy and I did have about this, that these would then be put under the consent agenda for approval.

But it's a roll call vote. That's why we didn't do it

because we don't roll

call the consent agenda. And then there was a point that just that's how and we approved as a as a body. We approved the new policies.

And I'm not disagreeing with what was approved and what was not approved by the the counsel. It just, I think a refresher before launching into it would have been better. That's my 2¢. Randy, you have something to say?

No. I, we did ask this is ringing a bell. We asked for clarity from legal counsel under which section, this takes place, and it's under it as as it's been done tonight, that's the correct section. It's not

That's fine. Consent agenda.

And that's on me because last time we talked, which was Monday Yes. I had told you consent agenda, I think. K. Because that's what we were we were asked from a counselor during counsel questions, shouldn't these be under the consent agenda? So I had to do a little digging, and the way you did it tonight

Is the appropriate.

Appropriate protocol. Okay. Per legal counsel advice. K?

Does anyone have a problem with a item a, b, or c being removed from the batch motion?

No. But I will ask if any of the directors present have anything they wanna add to their presentations from before, then I'm good.

Okay. I guess a roll call vote then.

Counselor Patton. Aye. Counselor Maldonado.

Aye.

Counsel President Hensley. Aye. Counselor Davis. Aye. Counselor Stearns. Aye. Counselor Waterman.

Aye.

Motion carries six zero. Item d, consider ordinance number one six six nine, an ordinance authorizing the purchase of server and storage equipment through Polar Systems utilizing a state of Oregon price agreement in an amount not to exceed $100,000 and declaring an emergency first reading. And, mister Wood, I think that is your wheelhouse.

Yeah. The just one minor correction. It's not the Oregon state price agreement. We actually got three bids. So so that should say yeah. We we're not using the Oregon State price agreement. Originally, we're going to, but we can get it cheaper through Polar by getting three bids versus going through the Oregon State price agreement. So I apologize for that.

Okay.

So we got we followed the procurement law. I got three bids on this. To make this somewhat brief, the servers have a average lifespan of five to seven years. The PD servers, there's two of them. One of them expires this year.

The other one expires next year. So we need to replace them. One of the ways we've talked about replacing them, and I think this is probably the best way to replace them, is to replace the servers and then pull the actual storage out of the servers and make it its own separate rack, which is called a SAN system. It's a it's a high speed system that's very robust for the police department, but it's a very expensive system. We in order to do this properly, I have to buy it all at one time.

I can't, I don't have a way to piece this out, because, we need to pull it out. We need to move one server, then get the storage in place, move the storage, the server to the storage, then put the other server in. So it needs to kinda all happen at once. This is just to buy the hardware, and I'm hoping I can buy it for a 100,000. If you know anything about the computer market, the prices are going through the roof at a speed that most of us can't get our hands around. I've gotten two bids in the last month. One was a 100,000. The last one I got was 84,000. By the time this goes through, it probably won't be 84,000. I'm hoping it'll still be under 100, which is why the emergency clause is in there.

Because the longer I wait, the more likely I am to pay significantly more. I've been told that it's possible it could go up as much as $50,000, and then I'm gonna have come back.

Oof. Okay.

It's it's they call it what do they call it? Ramageddon. Because it's the it's AI needs memory and it's eating up memory. And so the pry if if you buy anything with memory in it, the price is through the roof or if you buy anything with a video card in it, price is through the roof, and that's because of AI. And so this is a very unstable market. If I could buy it at the $84,000 I put in front of you today, I would do it, but the Charter doesn't allow me to do that. So I have to come before you. So this is what we like to do with the PD. We think it's the right move. We think it's a a better move for redundancy and long term storage at the PD.

The faster servers, they're more robust, but it's expensive. The install will have to come next budget year because I only have a $100,000 set aside just to buy the servers.

Okay. I think I amended the motion well enough if we wanna make that before we have discussion.

Any questions for mister Wood? No. You you being the tech guy. Yeah.

I I I know exactly what he's talking about.

If Paul doesn't have any questions,

I'm good.

I move to approve ordinance number one six six nine, an ordinance authorizing the purchase of server and storage equipment in the amount not to exceed $100,000 to second reading 05/06/2026 and declaring an urgency.

I said it.

Second.

Motion has been made by council president Hensley and seconded by councilor Maldonado to approve ordinance number one six six nine, an ordinance authorizing the purchase of server and storage equipment through Polar Systems in an amount not to exceed $100,000 to a second reading on 05/06/2026 and declaring an emergency. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Aye.

Anyone opposed? Oh, I forgot to say aye. Sorry.

That carries six zero. Thanks, Todd. Next this evening is a public hearing. This public hearing is to discuss, the city Of Camby's comprehensive plan and comprehensive plan map changes. That'll be Don, Hardy, Friends. So the matter presently before the hearing body requires a public hearing. All interested persons in attendance shall be heard on the matter. This public hearing was noticed and those who wish to speak were instructed to contact the city recorder and we did not receive any online requests to speak. Okay.

There actually is a person, Matt Ellison, our Planning Commission chair is online and he does want to testify.

Okay. I will make note of that. Thank you, sir. Those people that are interested in testifying as either proponents or opponents, please indicate your desire to speak by raising your virtual hands or your real hands at if you've turned in a card. Mister Emmanuel, yes. Mister Allison, are you on? Maybe he'll join us when we get

there. For

longer presentations, proponents and opponents may buy time from one another. In so doing, those either in favor or opposed may allocate their time to a spokesperson who will represent the entire group. All questions must be directed through the mayor. Any evidence to be considered must be submitted to the hearing body for public access.

There he is.

All written testimony received both for and against shall be summarized by staff and presented briefly to the hearing body during the staff report. The public hearing will be conducted as follows. There'll be a staff report by the illustrious Don Hardy, questions if any by the hearing body or staff. I will then open the public hearing for testimony. Proponents, so those that are four, will be given three minutes, and any opponents to the or in the hearing will also be given three minutes.

Mister Allison, are you a pro or a con for the comp plan? Matt, can you hear us? Mm-mm. It does not seem that Matt can hear us.

Zoom share is muted. Is that why or not? That's outside of my pay grade.

Dawn, can you reach I out to

have a cell number.

Thank you.

Ask him if he's got his computer muted.

A decision shall be sorry. I will then close the public hearing. We'll have questions if any additional ones by the hearing body and then discussion by the hearing body. A decision shall be made by the hearing body at the close of the hearing or the matter will be continued to date certain in the future. This will be the only notice of that date you will receive. Does anyone have any questions about the procedures of the hearing? Okay.

And mister Ellison does not have any I can't hear what we're saying. I can put him on cell when that time comes if that works.

Okay. Is he a proponent? He's proponent. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. That's what I needed to know. Okay. We will open up with the presentation. Sorry. Yes. Thank you,

mister mayor. Counsel, from the from the top here, Don, is going to take it away. This is an enormous

sorry. This is

too loud. This is everything okay back there? Yeah. Enormous slide deck that we're going to walk through tonight, and you guys have been working on updating the CAMBI comprehensive plan for a very long time. So I did receive counsel questions if we could, from the top, big picture, highlight major changes tonight that we're gonna walk through just for your own edification as you're getting into the slide deck.

You should feel free to ask questions throughout. Don's prepared to look for verbal cues from the mayor if there are questions. This is one of the longest slide decks I've seen since I've been here. There's a lot of information, but you're updating a comp plan from 1981. 1981, let that sink in, and there's a lot to cover. But

So I'll stand few changes. Yeah.

Forty five years.

I'll stand down and pass to Don.

Thank you, Randy. Good evening, mayor and council members. Steve Fowles from three j Consulting and I will be doing the presentation tonight. And I just wanted to start out, there is a PowerPoint that we'll bring up for this, but I did want to start out. There was a question that was asked by Counselor Stearns, which I think is a really important question through Randy, and to talk a bit about the comparison of the 1981 comprehensive plan and then now 2026 comprehensive plan and what are the substantive changes.

I'm gonna try to boil that down because we could be here literally all night going through the detail of this, but I would like to give an overview and hopefully that helps in the context here of the last three years and where we've been in the last three years doing other plan things that you've seen before you, I think will help in context. So we have a forty five year old comprehensive plan that we are updating. Obviously, new demographics and growth information on projections are part of that. Updated histories and policies are part of that. And in terms of the things that you all are aware of that have been adopted through city council, it is reflective of these items, the historic preservation plan, the housing needs analysis, the housing production strategy, housing efficiency measures, economic opportunity analysis, and natural resource preservation

through

the statewide policies, which it has to be in there, and environmental hazards and prevention of environmental hazards, updates on transportation and the transportation system plan policies and utilities. So that's kind

of a

comprehensive overview to an extent of this is an embodiment of all those items in terms of policies. It's so these chapters, these 12 chapters that are part of the comprehensive plan, I'm going go through those fairly quickly, which will give a highlight to main the main thrust of each one of those. So, chapter one, which is citizen involvement, this is about more articulation of policies related to supporting community engagement, also with focus on the Planning Commission and their role continuing in the position of being the body to review long range planning and city planning programs. Council's also involved, but that's the that's the that's that group has that focus. Chapter two sorry, chapter two land use planning is focused on the importance of to reflect the adopted housing needs analysis and housing production strategy policies related to housing and forecasted need based on projected population growth in the city.

Chapter five, which is the open space scenic and historic areas and natural resources, is a reflection of that natural resource preservation and the CAMBI historic preservation plan. We spent a lot of time with the chair and vice chair of the historic landmarks commission and walking through that process and making sure that the policies are are reflected in the historic preservation historic preservation plan are reflected in the comprehensive plan. Goal six, which is air, water and land resources, is reflective of storm water, air quality and noise mitigation related to those items. Goal seven, subject natural hazard and hazards is reference to the Clackamas County multi jurisdictional natural hazard mitigation plan and the new federal flood plain standards are key notes in that section of chapter seven. Goal eight, which is chapter eight is recreational needs and there's a significant emphasis on pulling all the substantive parks master plan policies into the comprehensive plan.

Goal number nine, which is chapter nine, is the economic development chapter, and that mirrors the economic opportunities analysis, which you all have reviewed and has been through the adoption process through council. Goal 10 is a reflection of the housing needs analysis, housing production strategy, and housing efficiency measures, which have all been adopted through city council. And chapter 11, public facilities and services, references city public services and can be utility services. Goal 12, chapter 12 is the transportation chapter and that reflects system plan policies that are you you all have seen it's not been quite adopted, but that will be before you on May 6. Goal 13 is the energy conservation and that reflects job housing balance to reduce commuting and those those kinds of issues related to transportation and promoting infrastructure to reduce travel congestion.

Goal 14 is urbanization, which is chapter 14, and that references back to the forecasted need for housing through housing needs analysis and the economic opportunity analysis and reflects the goals and policies of that. And, again, this is not an I can go into more detail on the specifics of the policies in the comprehensive plan, but essentially this 1981 comprehensive plan has been updated through these adoption processes that we've gone through that essentially we're referencing those policies in in the comprehensive plan. So, it's consistent with those policies that have been adopted over the last three years. And, that's the really the forward direction of the city. Lots of changes in forty five years.

DLCD, Department of Land Conservation and Development, asked the same question as Councilor Stern's. And we did have a summary in our staff report of kind of generalizing where those changes were, and they really understood as well that most of this is being changed. There's not a lot in the current comprehensive plan that is not being affected here and given the time frame that's gone by. So I'm gonna stop there. Hopefully, that gives some additional context to the question.

Yeah. I mean, I just for those who don't I mean, like I say, we have this and I I I I thank you for all this. It's lot of work, and I and I did read through the the plan. I just wanted to indicate, like, before we adopt this, if we adopt this, we have this other plan, and now we have a new plan. So what is what does that make the city now able to do that it couldn't do under the old plan?

And that was just kind of a a a question to ask because we've gone through all this process, and we got something new. But how is that gonna benefit the city having this new one versus the 45 the fact that it's old. I mean, some things like cheese and wine get good with age, but maybe comprehensive plans don't.

So the so the individual, like, for example, you know, addressing the policies from our housing needs analysis and maybe just one small example would be promoting planning that is like plan unit development, which is in in looking at open space and planning for open space and having a diversified housing portfolio that in 1981 was different than what we have today. So those

are now we have more options because this

We do. And those would be because of all the things that you all have seen that we've adopted through the council previously. It's really an embodiment largely of those already adopted economic opportunity analysis, housing needs analysis, housing production strategy policies that were already adopted in there. So to your question, it's really about bringing us up to speed with what we're what we're required to do through the state process already, which we've really embodied. So it brings us up to speed.

We're required to have an updated baseline for all all of our information. It has to be factually accurate in terms of where we're at. So it really has brought everything up to the current situation. When you all were going through each of those individual plan review processes, that kind of fits into a big puzzle here, which is like all 12 chapters are influenced by those decisions that were made previously. Okay. So really, there's not a lot you have not seen. I know it's been an isolated, adoption processes, but they're now all those pieces are now together into one comprehensive plan.

So, Don, between the last one and this one, how many comp plan amendments were done?

I believe there were some I know there was like an amendment for there was a small amendment and this is for the area, like the special area j. There was an amendment that did talk and these are very, like, few sentences. It was not a holistic update. So, they used the 1981 base plan and then they just added text to it. And so, really, it was not a post I mean, they probably went through post acknowledgment, but they were very minor changes.

And they like the chapters and, you know, they would just make a few sentences. I'd say there is probably less than a page of text changes overall in the last forty five years. Okay. Yeah. Thank you.

Alright, sir.

So I'm gonna continue. So that I'm hoping that this also kind of frames us up so I can maybe get through this a bit quicker here. So approval criteria, and these are items that we have to address as part of our comprehensive plan process, that the City Council and Planning Commission are reviewing this and that we're making the following we're judging that that these need to be consistent with this. So I'm gonna go through each of these individually. The remainder of the comprehensive plan of the city and the plans and policies of the county, state, and local districts that there's consistency to preserve functions and local aspects of land conservation and development, a public need for the change, whether the proposed change will serve the public need better than any other change which might be expected to be made, whether the change will preserve and protect the health, safety, and general welfare residents in the community and statewide planning goals.

So the approval criteria, first the first one is the remainder of the comprehensive plan. And again, a lot of what I just said about the consistency here with state and county, we obviously have to be reviewed by Calacamas County. They're they're aware of this. They don't have authority over the area within the urban growth boundary, but they are aware of what we're doing and we're working with them. This is consistent with state department of land conservation and development processes.

They've been very involved with the comprehensive plan update and have reviewed the comprehensive plan draft and provided commentary. So, in local district planning where, you know, we incorporated CAMBA utility into our review and consistency. We've really essentially local we've done a local embodiment of of for consistency and also related to all the prior adoption of the plans that I mentioned previously, it's consistent with that. Approval criteria two of public need. Again, I think the public need the strongest element is that it's been forty five years since this has been updated, and there's been also considerable significant community outreach over the last three years on this six community summits, online surveys.

There's been kind of local meeting areas where we've done pop up things where we've had community events. And I can go into more detail, but there's been a robust amount of outreach on this comprehensive plan update. Whether the proposed change will serve the public need better than any other change and part of that community outreach was a community visioning process and also a mapping process that included all the input from the community, which we consolidated into mapping, which it which we believe the comprehensive plan update that we're doing is reflective of that. Whether the change preserves and protects the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents in the community, we believe it is reflective of adopted plans and elements and preserves and protects health, safety, and general welfare of the community it is a reflection of community input. I'm going to turn it over to Steve to go through the statewide planning goals.

And these are again kind of highlights. We're not going of go through each individual one, just kind of overall the themes of this.

Thank you, mayor Hodson, council president Hensley, and counselors. As you know, excuse me. The comprehensive plan is your long range plan that guides future growth and development in the can be urban area. Just to recap kind of what is included, we started with a background report. All those documents that Don mentioned, the information, the policies, all of that goes into this comprehensive plan.

Unlike cheese and wine, the comprehensive plan does get out of gets old after time. And as your population grows, you have new ideas, new experiences. That all went into the community vision that guided the work to develop goals and policies, update the comprehensive map, which Don will speak to in a little bit, and then ultimately bring it all together for the comprehensive plan, which is then implemented through a variety of tools like the development code, zoning map, annexation of land, urban renewal plans, capital improvement plan, and other city plans and programs. Don mentioned community engagement. There were five summits.

We had a project advisory committee meet that met five times, a technical advisory committee that met three times. We did numerous briefings with you and the planning commission, held community conversations, and were at events like the farmers market and other events to talk with folks and then online engagement opportunities as well. Oops. So unlike, you know, Don laid out for you the the changes kind of big picture between 1981 and 2026, My focus here is we brought this this draft comprehensive plan to planning commission and city council in the fall. You can see some of the dates there.

We also got comment we got got got comments from both bodies. We also got comments from the Department of Land Conservation and Development. We then went to a hearing with the Planning Commission on March 9. They recommended it for approval unanimously with two minor additions that I'll mention this evening. So my focus is really gonna be what are those changes that we've made since we first brought it to you in the fall.

Some of it might look familiar because it's things you talked about, but I'm gonna go through this very quickly. For citizen involvement, we clarified that citizen involvement efforts should be, designed to reach all Canby community members. That was a request of the planning commission. The city will strive to make meetings accessible, including translation services with advanced request. That was the addition there.

We also, added a strategy for city staff and planning commission to review the comprehensive plan. It did say at least every ten years. Planning commission recommended every five years. I just wanna note that is for city staff and planning commission to review that comprehensive plan, not necessarily to update it, they felt comfortable recommending shortening that time period to five years. For land use, we added language, preventing, minimizing, or mitigating conflicts between land uses.

This was, a big, note from the community about noise and light pollution, as well as traffic impediment and impacts. You'll hear that again throughout this presentation. We modified language to encourage the preservation of downtown urban form through overlays and historic preservation. Another thing you'll hear quite a bit is, we've integrated policies from the historic preservation plan, but also worked with planning commission and and the, historic landmarks commission to consolidate that because there were a lot of policies and it was kinda overwhelming the documents. So we've consolidated that quite a bit.

We modified the language to encourage areas of higher density rather than ensure, and replaced the term land use map with comprehensive plan map to distinguish that from the zoning map. For goal five, we added language to the factual basis about soils, wildlife habitat, groundwater resources, and pre settlement history in Canby. One of the things I didn't mention earlier is that, you know, the the all the the new information that we have as the city's grown and changed over time, that, in the eyes of the state, is the factual basis that we need in order to make new policies that respond to these changes and to community desire. So that's what that background report is for is establishing that factual basis to change policies and make new policies. We reduced consolidated and clarified content from the historic preservation plan, added mention of the historic landmarks commission and its role, and added information about the historic preservation plan to be adopted as part of this comprehensive plan update.

Although, Don, I believe the comprehensive plan takes precedence over that historic preservation plan.

Yes. There was an intentional vetting of the goals and strategies of the historic preservation plan. This comprehensive plan with in concert with HLC chair and vice chair. So this this plan, because there was a reference back to 1981 comprehensive plan when that historic preservation plan was adopted in 2020, there was a large amount of reference back to policies, etcetera, that were from '81, which have now been updated to reflect in our comprehensive plan that we've lifted them and also updated them with in concert with HLC. So that's part of it.

Okay. We through our work and consultation with, DLCD, it was noted that the Canby Wetlands and riparian inventory, while approved by the city and, I believe, by some some at the state, it was not, approved by the Department of State Lands so that, local wetland inventory for the city is still going to be needed at some point, and I know Don and his team are, have that in their their plans. We added information about how riparian areas and wetlands are protected through overlay zones and added language about adopting floodplain regulations consistent with the recent Oregon FEMA biological opinion. In check goal six, we strengthened policies to address, again, those noise and other nuisances. Goal seven regarding natural hazards, we added a policy to require more than one ingress and egress for evacuation in and adjacent to natural hazard areas.

We added language about using the can be public works design standards to ensure safety for development of steep slopes, and through conversation with DLCD, did some rewording of natural hazards goals and policies, just language changes. Goal eight, recreation needs. We fixed the up the city standard to read a minimum of 10 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 residents, which is the city policy. We added a policy for the city to identify and pursue grants for park development and maintenance and modified one strategy to refer to creating a parks funding source rather than necessarily a parks district. Goal nine for economic development.

Again, we made some changes relative to the historic pres yeah, to integrate those historic preservation and policies and and consolidation. Goal 10 for housing. We removed a strategy related to encouraging compatible design. We added some language related to fair housing. We added a strategy to encourage medium and high density residential zone designations in areas being annexed to the city, and we added a strategy to develop sufficient utility capacity to accommodate growth.

Goal 11, public facilities and services. We added a strategy to notify DLCD when updating adopted public utility plans upon their request. I mean, that was a request to make that change. We modified a strategy to provide clarity on annual budgeting. We added a strategy to modify the SDC schedules with scaled charges based on home size, added a strategy to coordinate with the Canby School District on long term facility planning, and updated the plan with new information from Canby Public Utility.

Goal 12, transportation, coming from the transportation system plan. We added more information about Malala Forest Road Trail. We added language to make some policies coming from the TSP a little more specific to Canby. They felt a little bit generic, so we added some specificity. And then per request of the planning commission, we added a strategy to monitor progress of transportation system plan investments, including long term projects that connect outside of Canby.

They were specifically concerned about what was the term radius roads to connect Canby to other communities. Goal 13, energy. We removed and modified language again regarding historic preservation. We added a policy to address electric grid issues. We removed references to electric vehicles and broadened the strategy about solar panels to include alternative generation sources.

And then finally, goal 14, we removed, again, strategies referencing historic and cultural resources that are are shown elsewhere. We added or modified information about the Clackamas County City Of Canby urban growth management agreement and management of urban growth areas, and then added a strategy to notify DLCD of annexation and urban growth boundary amendments. One other, addition is we're adding Don mentioned all those plans that are referenced in the document or went into the document. We're adding a one page appendix that lists all of those plans so people can see, can go to those for more information on any of these topics. And I'm gonna hand it back to Don to talk about comprehensive plan map changes, but also happy to answer any questions when the time comes.

So the comprehensive plan map changes are pretty minor in this in this process. There's a number of cleanup comprehensive plan items that we'll go through first and the only major or more major comprehensive plan proposed change is to Area J, which we have talked with counsel about several times at work session. The cleanup items probably are really more in what I would categorize as Scrivener's errors because there's a there's a mismatch on the comprehensive plan designation to the underlying base zoning. And just to be clear here, we're only talking about the comprehensive plan, not the zoning of the property. So, I'm gonna go through these individually.

The first property is off of Knightsbridge Road and I'm gonna go through the details of this a bit more and the air photo is a bit more helpful. And so this property is zone low density residential. It is comprehensive plan designated medium density residential, but it is highly constrained by overhead utility lines, a hundred year floodplain, and the home there takes up most of the property. Staff felt that the underlying zoning of R1 is more reflective of what that should be and the comprehensive plan designation would be more appropriate as low density residential versus medium density residential for consistency purposes. So, that's the first map item.

Second one is in the area that is we're calling Area 10 and this area I'm gonna get a photo here is largely built out in a similar circumstance appears there, which is the property is on low density residential is pretty much fully built out as low density residential and is actually comprehensive plan designation designated as medium density residential. And we feel that the low density residential build out of the site is should reflect the comprehensive plan designation of low density residential and not medium density residential. Because there's really no potential for expansion of houses in this area. So the next item Yeah. Yeah.

So just as a perfect example, mean, so why does this change apply here, but not in the housing area in my screen to the left, you know, Northeast 13th Court, like back in there? Why? Or is it already labeled?

Those are already low density. Yes. So so they're they would be consistent. The other properties would be consistent with the they'd have consistent comprehensive plan and zoning with them. So we're just matching Yeah. We're just like for like. I mean, they're supposed to be consistent per state law. They're you're supposed to have consistency between the comp plan and the zoning. And I I don't know if these were just not caught previously or so there's an examination we're doing and we found these kind of anomalous situations there. And I think from a development potential, it's really minimal to none and just, you know, and it doesn't change the underlying base zoning in any case.

So, you know, there really is not much of an impact. Okay. Thank you. And then the next one is similar, which is another this one appears to me to be very much a scrivener's error. It's highway commercial designated property by zoning.

It is designated low density residential by comprehensive plan designation, and it is built out primarily as commercial development with with businesses that actually are highway commercial in their nature. And those would include a can be sign company, locksmith and auto repair, and a pump and drilling equipment supply building and there is a home in this area, but it already is non conforming anyway to the zoning. It might be converted to a commercial business at some point. So, that appears to us that it should have comprehensive plan designation of highway commercial to match up the zoning of highway commercial. And so the last one, which is the only kind of major change that we're addressing here is on the left here, can see the current comprehensive plan designation of what we're calling area j.

And that one, the first thing you'll notice is the boundary is really weird. It doesn't follow any property line boundaries. And secondly, even the current comprehensive plan calls out for a different mix of use in this area and is fairly specific for how undefined the comprehensive plan special areas are. This one was very specific. It called out a need for 12 acres of high density residential and minimum of 15 acres of medium density residential in this area.

This this the changes that are proposed also, it's kind of a mixed area here that Jarbro's restaurant and the property to the south that that you can see through the middle of this, a Walnut Street extension is drawn in there. You can see the right

of way through that, through

the the center there. So where Jarbro's restaurant is, it will it ironically just follows that line, and the split there is that Jarbro's restaurant would be on the essentially about the north side of that road, and then the south side is the Lions property facing Highway 99. That felt appropriate to us as well to recognize that interchange as well as Jarvis Restaurant as Highway Commercial because residential zoning would not be consistent with the restaurant that's out there that's fully developed. And so that that was part of it. And then the mix of what the end result is for the changes here, it's a net of about additional five acres of high density residential as proposed, and about 12 acres additional of medium density residential that's being added and about eight acres of highway commercial and whole here.

So this felt appropriate to us because Walnut Street Extension is also going right through there, which is a great access point. We see this as kind of a really nice opportunity to have a planned community in this area. We don't often get this opportunity to, like, look at this kind of greenfield, more of a greenfield area to plan it out while a road is going through that and providing for that mix of of housing that the current comprehensive plan calls out. So and this the changes that are made here do not diminish the acreage that we need for urban growth boundary expansion. There was a lot of discussion with Department of Land Conservation and Development.

They said, we will not reduce your housing needs analysis acreage for your urban growth boundary with these changes. And this is the kind of dynamic that we have in Oregon is that if you make a ton of changes for density in your in your city and you're doing an urban growth boundary, that counts against you and reduces your acreage that you need for your urban growth boundary expansion. So this does not make any changes to that, which is a positive.

So question, Don. So looking at the highway commercial on the proposed designation, does there anything that would prevent a developer from taking, if you can go back to

the Okay, other one, back. We

prevent a developer to or the landowners that are there to change or petition to change their medium density residential section into highway commercial so there's that connectivity between the two highway commercial spots.

On the area in red or are you speaking of that in specific or some area that's beyond that?

No. I'm just yeah. I'm just talking. So if you look at the Yeah. On again, under the proposed picture, you know, there's there's that red square that is now Jarbows, so to the west of that are the, know, like they're the individual property spots and then you've got what I think is highway commercial in the bottom corner of that big picture, correct?

And that is that part that's already on the edge is already that designation, that Right, so yeah.

So, could that could a developer or anyone transition or convert those the medium density into highway commercial?

There's a possibility that and just maybe the full kind of picture here is that Polish Homes has also been part of this discussion as well about the medium density residential, and they have plans to do a development there for residential in that area that's medium density. So that that's part of the the dynamic. We were working with the property owners on this as well. But but to answer your question, they could potentially do what you're what you're saying, but that would more likely, because of Polish's desire, be more of a mixed mixed density residential area. Okay.

Okay. Thank you. Yes, Randy. Don, is it fair

to say that entire area within the blue is going to be what we refer to as a planned unit development? It would be And explain that?

Yeah. Just the Getting air to the mayor's point. Absolutely. It's just and just the area yes.

I would agree with that.

I mean, I think that at least in development concept planning, and that is our goal here, is all the areas that are changing there, and this is really more concentrated on the South side of the of the area in blue because the North side we're not proposing changes to or and the East Side really as much except for the high density residential. I think it absolutely we want this to be a plan in terms of how that all comes in together. Would make sense when this annexation comes in and we've talked to the property owners around that discussion about how does this become an integrated even though they may be independent, how does this become an integrated so we don't have walled off situations? And there it's actually all part of a plan process, and that is the expectation. And part of this will be that Southeast 1st and Walnut Street and Southeast 1st are also gonna be part of this annexation as well, and that's the city park because those roads are not in the city now.

And so there's a combined effort that would be needed here under annexation. And to your point, there would be the the development concept was really essentially a master plan, to to answer that question. Hopefully, I'm I'm hoping that I'm answering the questions here, but there definitely is an intention to have a mix of housing and commercial here in the end. Okay.

Thank you.

And that kind of gets to the next slide, which is next steps. And so

Second reading?

Second. Yeah. Sorry. We have second reading, which will be on May 6. Yes. Then the state acknowledgment process is a twenty one day process post that, and then it becomes effective. And then from there, you know, applicants can come in for annexation applications through with development concept plans and then that could go through that process as the next step. But, the overall comprehensive plan would be part of that, you know, that state of acknowledgement would be for the whole comprehensive plan.

Okay. So, I know that you and your team and thank you for your work as well have been obviously touching base and following up with the Alphabet organizations that are land use boards. Are we seeing any potential landmines or pitfalls to this plan or pushback that's gonna slow this up or cause us to have more changes?

I I don't see that we've had folks that have come forward to be oppositional. We've been very transparent in our meetings and in particular with the mapping parts of this. I think it's pretty unlikely that we're gonna have challenges. I think those people would be providing testimony if there was that already. You would have already heard from those folks.

And we have actually received and and, you know, some positive commentary from the housing lands advocates, which is in your packet, and the Fair Housing Council, which is in your packet, actually saying this is an example for other communities related to housing. So that that probably would be the piece where people would come out and, like, say you didn't do enough, and that we haven't heard that. DLCD has also been super supportive of this. They've been very much involved in the steps here, so I don't think the state's really going to be oppositional here on this either. And then just I and this kind of goes back to some conversations that Randy was having about having, you know, we will have some legal counsel review of this as well, and that would be for, you know, them to look at this.

So that would be, you know, if there was anything substantive, it'd get brought up on May 6, and that could be discussed at that point. And I think those would be minor edits, to be honest with you. I don't think there I think there may be just a few items that they focus on. I don't think there's anything materially deficient. Think we would have heard from DLCD that to that extent if there was something materially deficient.

Okay. Thank you, Don. Any oh, sorry.

No. I'm sorry. That was that was it. Yeah.

You guys are good. Okay. That wasn't too bad. Well, and again, like you you opened up this evening with the point of there have been a gaggle of meetings. We've had two different technical advisory committees working on this for several years now going through this to get to this point.

So to able to distill all that work down to 39 slides is is pretty good. But it's you know, I know we have a couple of those technical advisory committee people here, Alan being one of them that it's a lot of meetings, it's a lot of reading, it's a lot of input to take in and kind of tailor this to where where is KMB gonna go for the next hopefully, we won't revisit this in forty years. It'll be sooner than that. So good. Any questions? Yes. Councilor Waterman.

The work that we're doing with the the SDCs and the and stuff that because that's we're not finishing that until July. Right? Or June?

July 1 is is the hope that we'll be back before you because there's a sixty day methodology notice that we have to deal. We're almost done with that methodology notice.

And that's a separate thing from this, so we're going be approving this before that?

It is, yeah, and there's really no consequential issues on that piece of it for the comp plan part of that. And you all may have questions more specifically as we get to the transportation system plan also on May 6 because that does have that list in the twenty year list does correspond to the twenty year list in the SDCs that you'll see in the SDC adoption.

Okay. Any

other questions on the presentation or for our planning team three j? Nothing? Okay. Alright, gentlemen. Don't go far because I'm sure there'll be more.

Thank you.

Alright. Since there's no questions, I will go ahead and open up the public hearing. First off, we'll hear from proponents of the plan, and I'll start with our planning commission chair, mister Ellison. Good evening, sir. How are you?

Good evening, mister mayor and counselors. Thank you for having me. I just really just wanna echo the support from planning commission to the council for adoption of the comp plan as presented. Three very long years of hearings and going through this process, lots of community engagement. I attended several myself.

I know other planning commissioners and counselors also attended. I really feel like the messaging to our community was very solid and well coordinated, very well communicated to the community. So many people have had opportunities to either view what the city is is doing through this process, but also participate and have their voices heard in the process, which was a lot of fun, particularly early on in the process when we were engaging the community to kind of put their stamp on what they see in terms of land use in the community, so that was a great outreach project. So we unanimously as a planning commission recommend the adoption of this comp plan and and that's about it for me.

Great. Thank you for being here this evening, and thank you to the to you and the Planning Commission for all the work that you all did on on your end to keep this moving forward and bring it here, into the finish line. So thank you very much, and please let the Planning Commission know that we extend our appreciation as well.

I will. Thank you.

Thank you. Next proponent is Ethan Manuel.

Good evening, sir. Good evening. Mister mayor, counselors, thank you for giving me a chance to come speak to you today. In addition to being a long term KMB resident, I was in fact one of those founding members or original members of the public advisory committee. So I got to attend all of those and I know the mayor and councilor Patton attended most or maybe all of those sessions with me as well and the other people on the committee.

In addition to that, I did, you know, all the community summits, the surveys, and that sort of stuff. I saw many of you or many of the planning commission at those things as well. All of that to say I had kind of a front row seat to watch this stuff come by, right? And it's a lot of stuff. It's things you've already seen like the housing needs analysis, the economic needs analysis, the housing production strategy, the thing you're talking about tonight, which is the comprehensive plan update, things you talk about in the future, TSP update, and so on and so on.

So there's been a lot of stuff come through this process and I'm just here as a proponent partly because I'm amazed that all of this stuff is getting done. You know, the the city staff, the consultants, the planning commission, city council, all of you guys have been intimately involved in this and it has taken years. Right? So this is not done without a consistent effort and consistent focus on it. I appreciate that.

As you guys look at moving this stuff forward, I think that it's just important that you hear a voice from the community. Sometimes I feel like you work on these long term projects and it comes time to approve it, and it's crickets. Nobody says anything. So I just wanted you to have a chance to hear a voice from the community, supportive of it. I think Don and team and the consultants have done a great job with the community involvement.

We heard from some of the consultants that the CAMBI's involvement was top tier in terms of the participation. I think that goes partly to the framing of the structure in terms of giving opportunities at multiple outlets for people, but also I think that's a testament to the community that they got involved in and said their piece. And I think this plan reflects that, so I'm just here as a a voice in in support.

Well, I really do appreciate your involvement and support and and being involved in the the technical advisory committee. It was. There's a lot of meetings and it's very heady stuff to kind of dive into. As you can see, just tonight was a brief overview, but everything that goes into it Yeah. You and the technical advisory committee had your hands on as well. So something to be proud of too as you look at how KV's gonna grow and fill in over the next ten, fifteen, twenty years. So really do appreciate the feedback and thanks for coming tonight. Yeah.

Appreciate it.

Thank You bet. Alright. I don't have any opponents listed, so I will close the public hearing on that. Any additional questions for the planning department or the consultants at all? No? Okay. Discussion at all? Thoughts? We won't make them start all over again? No. We won't make them start all over No. Okay. No discussion. Yes? Counselor Pradden, your hand was first.

Yeah. So this is huge. This is setting the road map for the next twenty years of this city, and the people to be a part of this process is pretty monumental. As mentioned, I sat on the, business, economic or the economic needs analysis group as

well

as the, advisory committee for this one, and it has been an amazing process to be a part of. I just wanna take this opportunity to thank the Planning Commission for the many meetings that they have put into this, the community partners that have weighed in on this and been a part of creating this plan, all of the individuals that were on the various advisory committees. I wanna also thank all the community members who stepped up and had a say and played a part in this future road map for the city, who attended all of the, community summits, some more contentious than others, which was awesome to see. So many passionate people, here in the city that wanna see the best of the city for the next twenty years, as well as those that attended events. City staff, especially the planning department staff and three j consulting.

But I really wanna thank you, Don. You have shepherded this city through this process in a way that I don't think many other cities would can have been able to do. Your knowledge and expertise in this has been instrumental for us getting this not not only just over the finish line, but in the time that it has been brought over the finish line. And with, from what I understand, very minimal pushback from the state, which I think is if someone's gonna go out and buy a lottery ticket tonight in hopes that they're gonna win big, this is the night to do it. This is when the stars have aligned.

So, you know, as well as folks here on this dais. We have all done something extremely special here, and we should be proud of it. And I can tell you that when I'm in my seventies, well, almost 70, and this plan comes back up for renewal, I really hope that people look at this look back at this and say, you know, the people that did this had their head screwed on tight. And while there was some challenges and some bumps, they really set us up for a good place for the future and then use what we've done here as a road map for the next twenty years, which by then I'll be dead. So I won't have much say in

the matter. So, yeah. Thank you. Thank you, councilor Braden. Yeah. I think how it was broken down the way that it was in each each of those pieces that you went over this evening that we were able to get in, vet them, dialogue about them, get cantankerous when we needed to on certain things, I think really is what really made this process smooth. Wasn't around in '81. I don't know what that process looked like. You can probably speak to how other communities have done it and if it's been done in a different way, I don't know a better way than what we've done. And so, I echo Jason's thoughts as well, Don.

Comment, sir? Yeah.

I just wanted to thank as well, Jamie too, you put a lot of work in those community summits and in the communication working with the community. I mean, the first, one of the first ones we had, there were so many people that showed up, we literally had to turn people away because there wasn't enough room, and so, do emergency reschedule. So for the community to to reach out or be involved, it's, really important and I appreciate that everything we've done the last three years. Like you said, it wasn't just one or two plans, literally doing the whole thing in three or four years for forty five years' worth of work is pretty monumental, and I know we still have a lot of

work to do, so I appreciate that.

Yeah. And I'm excited to see now these plans come to fruition. So thank you.

Councilor Davis.

Mister Mayor, are you ready for a motion?

I am. If no one else has any other comments, then by all means.

Thank you. I move to approve, ordinance number sixteen seventy, an ordinance adopting the City Of Canby comprehensive plan and comprehensive plan map changes to a second reading on 05/06/2026.

Second.

A motion has been made by councilor Davis and seconded by councilor Patton to approve ordinance number sixteen seventy, an ordinance adopted in the City Of Canby Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Plan map changes to a second reading on 05/06/2026. Any further discussion or comment? All those in favor.

Aye. Aye.

Anyone opposed? That carries six zero. Great job, everyone. Thank you very, very much. It's huge. It is five minutes to nine and our council goal policy state that we adjourn at 09:00. We still have a number of items to go through. Is there

I say What's the appetite of to 09:30 ping that we started at 07:30. It's still a two hour meeting.

I agree. Mhmm. I'd rather go home, but I guess

So you're a no on continuing? Okay.

There's not much. We can probably do it in half hour.

Okay. Okay. So Still recovering

That's what I say. It's 08:15.

Don't you go on vacation? I was gonna say, don't you go on vacation, Ron? Alright. So we'll extend our meeting until 09:30 and then reassess from there. Thank you everyone. I appreciate that. There is no other business, mayor business. Walnut Street, if you are familiar with the Walnut Street property or plan or project or whatever you wanna call it.

No idea what you're talking about.

No. Yeah. We don't even talk about it. There's not any Walmart anymore because Camby X has gone through and carved it all the way through and has done a lot of work in a very short amount of time. So, if you haven't gone over and seen it, do a drive by.

It's pretty cool. On the Clackamas County coordinating front, our last meeting was really heavy duty on workforce development and kind of where Clackamas County is at on looking ahead to attracting companies, and do we have the workforce to be able to do that, and how is AI changing workforce, and, what do we need to be able to, be doing as a county and individual cities moving forward on that front. And so we also discussed our county, the Coordinating Committee retreat. Again, counselors, you are invited to come up and be a part of that. If you wanna get into things like housing, workforce, and transportation.

So, that'll be a very busy day and a half. So, then weekend. It is June

It's overnight.

Fifth and sixth, and it's up at Welch's. Welch's in Mount Hood. So Teresa and Maya have the information and she can they can send it out if you want. In fact, Teresa, will you just send that information out to the council? Thank you. And then finally, the Region 1 Area Commission On Transportation. We had a very How did you call those meetings that were held in the community for the comp plan? Spirited?

There were some that were very spirited.

Okay. So we'll say that this one was very spirited because Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Transportation Commission have changed how funding is going to be allocated for transportation projects. And so our task in this was to whittle down basically 30 projects within our area and then and so bring it down, whittle it from 30 to five, and it got really kinda cantankerous because they part of the group wanted to move forward three projects that were specific, which was what our task was. But they also instead of doing five, they did three, and then they wanted to address and put forward what they called buckets. So projects, multitude of projects within a certain category.

And so that created a lot of conversation and consternation because there were other projects that were moved off the list mostly for, one for Clackamas County and then two for Hood River. And so it just created a whole mess of issues and conversation. But so, and you got ODOT funding and OTC, but the big ones are being I two zero five expansion, which is generally not generally, but impacts us on making sure that that moves forward in expansion, which creates a whole other conversation about Abernathy Bridge and lane expansion and tolling potentially still on a conversation piece down at the state. A ton more to come up here as the the long session is not too far away and that will be hashed about very dramatically for sure when that occurs. So that's all that I've got.

We will start with councilor comments and liaison reports. We we'll start with council president Hensley this evening.

Oh, wow.

Thank you, mister mayor. You already covered c four, traffic safety commission. There's a lot of chatting about red light runners, u-turners, and speeding around the Fairgrounds Triangle. So watch how you're driving out there, folks. We're gonna be talking about some more enforcement issues on those areas.

I wanted they're gone, but thank you again to Michelle and Jackie for coming in about the coalition. We are still looking for more partners. So if you know organizations, stakeholders, etcetera, that can help because we have more plan parents nights to plan, etcetera, so that'd be great. Camby suicide prevention task force is planning QPR training, and that will be mid May. We're trying to nail down the details, so I'll have more on the May 6 meeting. And I have a proposal for the council. Do you want it now or after the rest of the comments?

No. It's your it's your time.

So

Okay. Well, in our, earlier meeting, we had some discussions about, in the in the work session meeting about some things that maybe we want to address, as far as the legal goes. And so I would like to make a motion that we issue a blanket waiver for the regular business meeting and let the city administrator go over the agenda. And if there's a public hearing or some kind of new business that needs legal attention, that we invite them

back. Second.

So motion's been made by council president Hensley and second by councilor, Patton to provide a blanket excuse of legal counsel dependent on agenda items as reviewed by city administrator. Does that work? Any further comment on that or discussion? So this would work like

the attorney won't come unless invited or Mhmm.

That That's correct.

That's that's that's what

And that's

what Emily was talking about before.

Okay. So so you'll still come when invited. Right?

Of course. And executive sessions and all that. So I'm talking about the regular business meetings.

If I may, the the reason it's kinda being worded like this is because technically in the city charter, we as a council make the decision whether legal council should or shouldn't be here, not the city administrator. So by us giving a blanket waiver and leaving and authorizing Randy as city administrator to make that decision, it it essentially fills that loophole in the in the, charter.

Okay. Because in the past, you've you've mentioned that you've you've excused the, the the the attorney for meetings, but without this kind of vote, but that was that just was I was asking

I was asking the mayor in the past.

Okay. So the mayor and the and As a But that wasn't really enough legal legality or whatever?

Oh, you're right. The charter does have the city attorney and city administrator as the employee, if you will, of the council. But that's just I only remember one time that that had happened. So we're trying to make it easier for everyone by doing this motion now.

So just kind of flips around the order. So versus going meeting by meeting to determine whether or not having our legal representation here, we're flipping it so that it then becomes more about if there's a warrant. They're just excused unless we need them there.

So I think we're good enough to be without the attorney. I'm just Mhmm. I've always She brought it up in the work session. Oh, I know. I know.

But I've always I've always found that having legal advice at the at the beginning is much cheaper than needing it after For sure. The incident happens because no one's there to say, hold on. Maybe we shouldn't do this when we're doing something at the meeting. And so my concern on that is that we'd be subject to having to do hire the attorney to clean up things that otherwise wouldn't necessarily need to be cleaned up because the because we were allowed to carry on do something that somebody who knew better would have said hold on. No.

I mean, it's a fair argument for sure.

And so I'm I'm wondering if we by doing this, we are in order, you know, to, you know, penny wise and pound foolish, as I say, to do it to to to do it this way. And and I I just do that as much even though I sometimes disagree with what the attorney says, like, as you saw in the court session meetings, I still respect what they're what they say. And I yeah.

Okay. Counselor Davis.

I feel real comfortable with our interim city administrator making decisions as to when legal representation is necessary and or I'm sure Emily's gonna be looking at our agenda and can talk to the city administrator as well. And even the gentleman the other gentleman, which is Curtis Chad. Chad. Chad basically said that even Hillsborough, which is a very large city Yeah. Many times they don't have a city attorney present.

And they represent Malala and they're never there either.

So

Okay. Councilwatermann?