City Council - Regular Meeting

what you have. All right. Call the uh work session to order. Our discussion tonight is about our uh 2425 audit and we have finance director Zach here. He's going to tell us all about

Yeah. So, uh, apologies. Um, Rick was supposed to be here. He was planning on being here. Uh, I won't get too far into why he's not here, but there's a there's a he's good. Uh, there's a very good reason that he's not here. Um, so he he told me to apologize on his behalf. And as most of you know, Rick is now retired. So, he was working into April to to close out some of the projects that he still had ongoing and so he wanted me to pass this lovely meeting and working with all of you over the years. So, so with that I am going to do my best to fill his uh much more knowledgeable shoes um and give the presentation that he would have given from memory. So, so here's so all of you have the presentation in your one drive now. Um, so you don't have to remember this a lot or you don't have to remember this verbatim. There's a lot of wording on all this, but I tried to pull the the highlights out of the audit. Um, as I thought it pertained to all of us. So, quick agenda. So, why do an audit? Uh, I mean, the easiest answer is because the state of Oregon requires it. Uh but uh in all reality beyond that um it puts all of the folks with a financial interest in the city on the same page, right? Be that the folks that work here, the folks that revi reside here, um you all or the folks that hold our our current or potentially future bonds, right? They need to know that we're doing what we're supposed to be doing. uh in the uh governance of the city

financially. Uh and for me personally, it's a good endofear double check to make sure that I haven't missed anything, right? You can always use an extra set of eyes. And we pay these folks to find find my mistakes and I promise you they they will they kick over a lot of rocks. So, um, getting into I know all of you read the 200page audit report that came through. Mr. Bear's just raising his hand. He does.

Uh, so the highlights of of it, at least for me, I went to this page and he said it's a it's an unmodified opinion. And what that means, you might have heard clean opinion stated before. Um, that's what this is. So, you're getting ahead. Sorry. Um, so it's important to note that doesn't mean that we had zero errors. We we did and we worked together to fix them. Um, what it does mean is there they in the process that they went through, they didn't find any material errors, any instances of of fraud or malfeasants, um, any misstatements or omissions in the in the financials. And um that's exactly what I want to see and what you all want to see.

Um so as part of this so the first thing I look for is the clean opinion and then I look for all the all the related items that come after that. So uh we didn't change any any of our accounting policies in a material way. Um the main one that you might see here that we will never do is switching uh the basis of accounting. you can go from we we use uh acrruel accounting to to and cash cash basis accounting is is the other generally accepted one um I've used both Denver used modified you can modify either of them too uh Denver used modified cash uh basis and so here we used modified acrruel basis um they found no transactions I'm looking over your shoulder t I apologize I know what you're looking at.

Uh, no transactions that lacked authoritative authoritative guidance or consensus. Uh, disclosures were neutral, consistent, and clear. No material audit misstatements. Um, thankfully, no disagreements with me, Spencer, John, or anyone else in in management. Um, no difficulty dealing with us either. Uh, we did not cons u bring on an outside accountant. Sometimes people will do that. um for a second opinion if we don't agree. There was there's no reason for us to do that really because they pretty he is much more knowledgeable than I am on the technical side of accounting. So um and then the last bullet point there was a state approved delay in the filing. Um that is on both of our parts I believe mainly ours. Um the switch over with accounting systems I thought if you would have asked me in October went very smoothly and then they start kicking over rocks and they're like well why is this here and not here and so then we had to go back and get with Cassell and go hey I don't think you set this up right so that happened for a few different few different areas of it thankfully I think we've got it all under control uh moving forward and I've taught my folks how to try to recognize some of these missteps before we get there. Uh internal controls and compliance. So they found they uh they take a look at internal controls to make sure do their best to make sure that um that duties are are spread across the organization in such a way that it doesn't allow one person to have too much control over the city's finances. Right? So you don't

want the person who has control of the general ledger and can affect that to also be the person who writes the checks who also is the person who cashes the checks, right? You want those duties to be spread across uh to multiple people because it lowers the the risk to the city and and decreases the chances that anyone's not honest with it. Um so thankfully no weaknesses in internal controls and no instances of non-compliance uh under um government auditing standards, but there were a couple places where we went over budget. Um and so those are all in your packets. Uh in the in the general fund, we had some legal expenses at the end of the year that I hadn't planned for. Um, and we had some expenses related to stepping stones that uh I expected to come in this year that just came early. um community development. They when we when we hired our building official, he came in at a higher rate than I expected him to and so um I expected some of their excess capacity in some other places to be able to compensate for that and it wasn't able to. Uh the water fund, there's an adjustment that we make for water, sewer, and the uh public works. they have a storage facility full of parts that they use throughout the city. And so at the end of the year, I've got to adjust those um what we have on hand versus what we had on hand last year. And that difference ends up as an expense or a credit on our books. And so the water fund uh that created an overage there.

And then the convention center, that was my biggest fear last year. uh going into uh us moving budget around to make the the budget work. And this is a much lower number than it could have been, but we moved as much funding as we could to try to cover the food expenses in the convention center. And it still was $6,000 short, but it was backed by revenue. Correct. Yes, that's 100% backed. Zach, on the stepping stones cost, um is that then the expense for next year will be reduced? We will not have that expense next year. Yeah, those were all capital costs. Okay.

Y I was going to say that's probably about the cost of the entire project, right? No, the the entire project was in the realm of oh gosh, I'm going to be ballparking here, but I Yeah, I think it was about 300 grand plus stuff in public works, too. Sorry, say that again. Like, wasn't that for the fence and the gate public works and all of that or was that just

Yes, but it all got coded the the project for stepping stones all got coded to the general fund non-EP departmental line. We we coded that entire thing there so that I could tell folks this is what this code says as opposed to the the other uh option would be to spread it across the city. But there's no real reason to do that. Go back a slide. Just looking at the number, you know, the biggest number by far there is the 58 grand. These are such tiny amounts out of our entire budget. They really need to be that close for um being overbudget. You don't have the 10% rule or because these are some of these are small

budgets. It's more than 10%.

Yeah. So, so I've adjusted the way I this has been an iterative process for me, right? So, I've I've adjusted going forward in this next budget and added a bit more contingency to some of the some of the funds where we have this variance. Um, that all requires that you all sign off on it, of course, but um yeah, I I looked at some areas at this point last year and said, "Hey, this is about how much I think I think we need." and um and my projections were off. I I won't go as close this next year. I'll I'll go 10 or 15% over what I think we need. Um that's not to say that that would 100% cover it if some something happened came out of the blue, but it at least gives us a little more cushion to say I mean at least four of the five of those wouldn't have happened had I done. So, um, so that's my learning experience from this.

That just seems very tough to get that close at the end of a year where you don't have everything in, right? And you have to have it in for the budget, right? So, you're between a rock and a hard place, right? You know, we're projecting uh best case scenarios that we're projecting. Okay. It's just I'm glad it's your life, not mine. So what's the downside of over projecting and being uh realistically uh I mean you never want to you never want to quote unquote had a budget right? Um because there is a scenario where you could say

let's just take um let's take you all well no I don't want to use you all for example

let's say convention center for example um if I went We in reality we transferred all the funds that we had available last year to cover food expenses. But if say say we had excess capacity and we didn't transfer it all, right? If you transferred an extra 25% of a fairly large number, which the convention center was, then someone if and I pay attention to this stuff, but if someone was um knowledgeable in their budget, they could all of a sudden see, hey, I'm not going to need 60 grand of this. What do I have on my budget now that I that I or what what can I purchase

with those extra money with the extra money that Yeah. So, that's I mean that's the only real downside because otherwise if you don't spend it, it drops to the bottom line anyway. So,

but that said, I do I do pay attention to that stuff. So, uh, and then, um, you haven't seen this before, at least at least in the time that I've been here. Um, because of our our expenditure of the ARPA funds, we had to go undergo what's called a single audit through the federal government. Um, that threshold is about threequarters of a million. So, if your federal grants um if whatever you spend on federal grants over the course of the year combined is is above 750,000, you have to go through this process. And so, um so we did that with the purchase of the park this year, uh or in the previous year, excuse me. and um were deemed a lowrisk oddity which is the which is the uh best risk profile that they have. So um but that did that did add to our cost just a touch um for the audit process.

Then a quick a quick snapshot of our uh the city's uh position. So the city's total net position, this does not include the uh urban renewal agency. You can see that below, but uh is about 63 million. So that's assets uh on hand minus any liabilities that we have. So if if you're in a private setting, this the equivalent to this would be equity and something. Uh general fund balance 11.55 million. Uh unrestricted cash and investments. That's probably not the same way that you guys would think of it, but it's actual liquid cash that we have on available that u can be spent for something. Not necessarily. The way that we use restricted or unrestricted is usually in the context of of tourism taxes. Um so that's not quite the same thing, but that's what they mean there. Total long-term debt is close to 26 million. Uh capital assets close to 60. And then uh you can see the urban renewal is at about 2.6 million. So business type activities. So these are our enterprise funds. Uh water net position decreased uh by 395. That was primarily driven by the u transfer that we had to pay to pay the loan that the convention center made to it. um sewer position increased by 320 um stronger stronger than typical revenues and then the convention convention center decreased by uh 37,000. So for total net net position decrease of 112,000 thereabouts.

So they the convention center decreased despite the fact that there was a 395 transfer from water. there was a one point close to $1.3 million transfer from water. Um we did not so last year in in years past when we transferred uh transient room taxes to the convention center it was a fair amount more than they needed. Last year we scaled that back and so that that decrease is the is the difference. I tried to get as close as possible to keeping them um at break even. Yep.

Good. We subsidize the convention center substantially. Absolutely. It you know $2 million I think is what I saw. So keeping it even is a good deal. So on that water net position decrease, you're saying that was a loan repayment from the water to the convention center that correct had been hasn't that been around a while? Years earlier, right? It it was I think taken the year before I got here. Um the year or two. I I don't remember the exact year, but it

Yeah, it sat on the books. And if if you remember to um kind of this time last year when we were in the budget process, we had spoken about paying that back and then taking another loan from the convention center this year for a smaller amount to get to make sure that the cash flow got through this year. I don't think we're going to have to do that. Uh, I think the position in water is good enough that um that we won't uh primarily because the the water tank project was less expensive than I thought it was going to be. Um, so I don't see any reason to take a loan out if you don't have to. It just adds to my adds to my job on keeping track of it. And

so so the water loan will be paid back. Water loan has been paid back. This is it. No, it's okay. So, it's it's in terms of inter this is only for inner fund loans. Um the water the water fund has no inner fund loans at this point in time. And on the sewer, the net position increases due to our revenues being more than our expenses. Correct. Yep. So, does that mean we don't have to consider raising rates or where are we at there? That will ultimately be your choice. Um, I wouldn't that's not how I would say that. No,

I think a lot of the operation side is because they weren't fully staffed and so it took part of the year to get fully staffed savings there. Uh, there was an under under expense of capital versus what we thought we would be we would have the the capacity and and personnel to be able to to spend and get out there. Um, so between those two things, those are kind of the those are the those were what I would say were the main drivers drivers of that. Okay. And then as I as I mentioned, this was Rick's last year with us, unfortunately, because he has been excellent to work with. Um, so as part of that, we need to we started the new the process to try to find a new audit firm. Um, that is currently live. I've spoken to at least one auditor about it. And I'm I am optimistic about this process, but on in the back of my mind, I know there is a a very high shortage of auditors in the state.

And so I I am interested to see what kind of a response we get back.

Uh we did so Rick was our auditor. Um he obviously did the urban renewal agency. He also worked with Sunset Empire and their foundation. And so to try to get a bit more um eyes on this, make it a little more attractive if you will, we did partner with Sunset Empire on the RFP. So there they will be two separate contracts. We won't have the same contract as as them uh when we ultimately award an audit firm the work. Uh, but we were hoping that by partnering together an auditor can look at it and go, "Well, I don't just have to go out to Seaside today. I can go to Seaside, get work half the day, and then go over to Sunset Empire and work half the day there and get a little bit more done versus just coming out here to see us. There's plenty of work for just us, but um, we were hoping that, you know, by partnering together would make the bid more attractive." Do any of our neighboring cities have auditors that would like to bid on?

I do. I have not I have not asked them that yet. I think we would we would definitely since we're trying to get them to be interested, we will definitely find out who their auditors are and request a proposal from them. Okay. Great.

Okay. So takeaways for this uh a clean audit uh I made a point of the overexpenditure uh from from a governance standpoint it's it's I don't want to put a feather in my cap but it's it's pretty pretty strong as far as audits go. Um I I will of course learn from the over expenditure piece, but in terms of everything else, I was pretty happy with what he found. Okay, we got time for So again, I'm going to do my best to answer any questions that you have uh with the caveat that there is a chance that I might have to get with Rick about some of these questions. So with that, I will answer any questions that you guys have. This might be a question for Spencer, but what are the kind of theory and benefits of sticking with the same audit firm year after year as opposed to getting a new one and having a clean fresh set of eyes on the books?

Well, luckily for us, we don't get to choose that this year no matter what.

So, GFOA, which is the Government Finance Officer Association, recommends um going out to bid changing ours every 5 years, um does accomplishes two things. One is ensures that uh our finance director and the other don't get too buddy buddy and uh uh that there is really an independent look at it and that's the benefit of changing it periodically but doing five years allows um enough kind of meat on the bone for them to be interested. Typically an auditing firm will have a lot more expensive and need a lot more time in the first year and then they can make up for it in subsequent years. And so, uh, GFOA has determined that five years is the best middle ground of enough years for the auditor, um, but, uh, changing frequently enough to preserve the independence of the opinion we get. So, that's probably what we would do is is do we put a term on that audit on the RFP? Okay. Yeah.

Um, yeah. The only the only caveat to Seaside specifically is when we were in the old system, I I don't know how many auditors in the state deal with that, but our auditors the AS400 Yeah. Um Rick was at least wellversed in where all where the shells all were. And so, um, it w he was he was pretty good at sorting through that that system and frankly indispensable when I got here because there were a lot of questions that I'm looking at

whoever I can say, "Hey, what is this?" And he was very good at and and very patient at working with me for that. I noticed um just because I assume it'll help us. One of our bonds is going to have paid off either. Well, here this year. Yep. Um do you remember how much I was just looking through to see how much it's our water general obligation bond and it's about 470,000. So that cash flow will be freed up in the water. water fund next year.

That's good. The other curious thing is that it appeared the ending fund balance in our ARPA account was negative. Is that something that just didn't get It was corrected this year. Okay. Yes. I assume it was probably the last year's interest or something like that. It was. Okay. What's the rule of thumb on, let's say, annual revenues compared to long-term debt? What's a sustainable number that you would shoot for in a city? I would I'm assuming capital assets don't really come into play because we're a city. We were not really selling anything.

For whatever reason, bond holders like to have those numbers on the books of our assets, but you're right. We can't sell. What kind of an asset is a sewer line or a water line or a sidewalk? it doesn't help very much. I don't know if there is a rule of thumb for what you're talking about. Uh there may be if we looked into it further. Yeah, I I would start to get nervous at probably 40% probably 30% depending somewhere in that in that realm I think is a is a good barometer depending on the individual city. I think JFOA says 35%. I think you're right there.

This is a little bit off topic, but on the HR side, do we have anything similar or do we do anything similar here with not an audit, but is there any outside review of HR policy best practice? Um,

so a couple of things. One is we um our insurance agency CIS uh puts out recommended policies and makes an update. And so John's right in the middle right now of updating the employee handbook that contains much of that information based on their January 2026 update. And so that's kind of what we rely on for that. And then when it comes to um I don't know if this is related or not, but kind of uh wage studies and things like that. Um that's something that um this year as we be go into negotiations uh with the public safety union that we've asked to get the comparables done to help the negotiations be more informed. Um I'm not sure if there are other policies outside of that. John, do you want to tackle that?

The one thing that I know Do you hear Mike?

No, I I can hear myself, so um I didn't have I don't I didn't have engagement with Rick on every audit, but one thing that they would do as well, and I think probably more so with Lea and as our payroll accountant, they would check our payroll status documents. So, hey, notice that this individual's pay changed in this time period. Can you produce documented that shows that illustrates the reason for that, the rationale for that? So, we would do that, keep those kinds of records. Um, and there'd be some questions around kind of our HR practices from the same audit. And that actually when I came over to into administration I mean I guess I was financial audit but they they were asking questions around and I don't know that it's so much included in this report but they at least went through some best practices and made sure we were following guidelines in that regard too. I don't know if you want to add to that Zach but that was my experience on the HR side with our auditors. Yeah, they looked at um pay. They wanted to make sure that we were paying the people that we said we were going to pay. So, they asked us to to produce the the payroll records and the direct deposit records for that. They took a look at the um the pension liabilities. Um so, I looked up these numbers because I thought this might this question might come up. We went from in 20 at the end of 2024 we were at 57% for a funding level and hold on I wrote this down so I don't want to guess and at the end of this uh this audit period we were at 65.6%. So

yeah we we've increased about about 8% over the past year. Now, we did um the trustees for the pension are myself, uh John, and Spencer. And we did a couple years ago take a look at the investment mix um and update that with with some more modern calculations and risk profiles. And so what that in theory did was increase increase the potential for returns on that. We also as as we've gone through the budget the last few years have have pretty drastically increased our contributions to try to catch up and make that number a little more healthy. So, um I'm happy to see that that's going in the right direction.

Do employees have the ability to change their um contributions within the pension uh the funds that they want to participate in? you know, they can they can basically piggyback on what the city's doing. And so there is a voluntary contribution that employees can make uh with a guaranteed rate of return. And so they can do it from that standpoint. But um if they want to choose an investment mix, there's there's another vehicle called uh deferred compensation that we use that we have through deferred uh no um defined contribution. I'm talking about a different plan,

right? I'm just saying that I think you're talking not the 457. I'm talking about the the other one. The Oregon Gross S. Yes. The Oregon Growth Savings Plan. And so if they want a little more leeway over their own investments, they can defer part of part of their compensation into that plan and then they can they can open up a Schwab account and they can do all sorts of stuff with that. It's been really good. Did that address like what you were asking around HR or is there something specific that you were Yeah. No, I was just Yeah, I was just interested in in how that kind of fit into here and we had uh some similar kind of audit activities in Denver. So, I just wonder

from a from a pension standpoint, there is no there is no electing to be more more risky or less risky or but the 457s they can do whatever they want. Yes. Okay. Thank you. I have a funny story. Okay. when I worked for the little city of Edamclaw, Washington, population 10,000. Been there? Yeah. We had um I think I was started out as 15 and then anyway um when I went into detectives, I inherited the property. Well, nobody had audited the property room in years.

Yeah. And then um here comes the accreditation team because so we had money missing, we had narcotics missing. We had guns missing. What you want to see? No. Right there. I'm like, um, you guys haven't done an audit in how long? So yeah, it was it was quite embarrassing, but they couldn't pin it on me. You were new. Yeah, it you don't want to have those things missing. That's true. And good thing they did it at the beginning of of your tenure with them.

I think that's all I have for Thank you. I'll be back in 30 minutes or so. one of the best explanations we've had. Oh, thank you. That's very kind of you. I didn't have anything else. You got it done. So, you can have 15 minutes, 20 minutes, whatever it takes. Everything on tonight's agenda is fairly simple. So, I'm not to discuss that. Mayor, have we heard anything back from ODA last meeting?

We we uh have a public works update tonight that will include uh some update on that. Not quite. Did you? Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.

Call the city council meeting for April 13th to order. Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Kim, please call the role. Thank you, mayor. Councelor Ansboro present. Councelor Hoffman present. Councelor Baker here. Council President Moresy here. Mayor Ryan here. Councelor Montero present. Thank you. I have a motion for approval of the agenda. So moved. Second. Council President Moresy. And there was somebody on my left. Okay. Councelor Hanssboro. All those in favor say I. I.

I. Any opposed? Motion carries. We have uh two proclamations tonight. First up is the National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week and here to uh talk about it is our illustrious chief of police. You're welcome. Our dedicated not on.

Thank you so much. There you go. Anyway, yeah, what a great time to be able to celebrate our 911 telecommunicators. is there are some dedicated staff we have with the police department who are that first line of our first response to any kind of uh emergency call for service and uh as I gave in our annual report recently we've got eight of them and and several of them are you know 20 years of experience and all the way down to actually probably less than a year but most of them are right in line with having many years with our department and we're happy to have them all and we really appreciate you guys recognizing them with this proclamation. So, thank you so much.

Happy to do it. I've asked councelor Hoffman to read the proclamation.

And I'll repeat what I said last year. I I was a 911 dispatcher and call receiver while I was on light duty um in Edenclaw and it is a very stressful job. So, we're we're lucky to have dedicated people that have stuck around for 20 years. the proclamation. Whereas emergencies can occur at any time that require police, fire, or emergency medical services, and whereas when an emergency occurs, the prompt response of police officers, firefighters, and paramedics is critical to the protection of life and preservation of property. And whereas the safety of our police officers and firefighters is dependent upon the quality and accuracy of information obtained from citizens who telephone the Seaside Police Department communication center. And whereas public safety telecommunicators are the single vital link for our police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel by monitoring their activities by radio, providing them information and ensuring their safety. And whereas public safety telecommunicators of the Seaside Police Department Communication Center have contributed substantially to the apprehension of criminals, suppression of fires, and treatment of patients. And whereas each dispatcher has exhibited compassion, understanding, and professionalism during the performance of their job in the past year. Now therefore, I, Steve Wright, mayor of the city of Seaside in the state of Oregon, do hereby proclaim the week of April 12th through 18, 2026 as National Public Safety Telecommunicators Week.

Thank you. Next up is the Seaside Arbor Day celebration as well as the Tree City USA. And I have uh Victoria Fuller here who is the chair of our tree board. Go ahead and Yeah. bend it down. There we go. There we go. Welcome.

Thank you. Um, I thought the proclamations were read first and since they're second, uh, I might just say that, um, you will hear as a part of the proclamation that just not any city gets to be a Tree City USA. There are certain things that cities have to do and requirements that must be met to obtain that designation. and Seaside is on its 28th year of doing that. Um, I did write a little blurb, very short, about what the tree board has been doing to keep busy this last year and the year before. Um, in the interest of educating the public regarding trees appropriate to the north coast, the city tree board volunteers have been on a mission to resuscitate the city's small arboritum that was planted at the seaside museum in 2007. So, working with the Pacific Power Foundation's community grants program, we have been busy with the arboritum's refurbishment. Its dedication will be at the end of May. As chairperson of the city tree board, it's been a pleasure working with board members Rosemary Baker Monahan, Jeff Bowman, Pam Fleming with Nature's Helping Helper Landscaping, and our newest member, Steven Christopher, as well as our public works director, Paul Stall, Leah Griffith from the Seaside Museum, and our city council liaison, Tita Montero. We as a group take pleasure in encouraging tree planting in the city on public and private land and through the arboritum hope to expand citizens

interests in trees that are well suited to the local environment. Thus expanding Arbor Day to an ongoing daily experience for seasiders. Thank you very much. You're welcome. And yes, I've asked uh the treeboard leaison, councelor Montto, to read the proclamation.

Yes. And and um before I read it, I'll just say the um the proclamation is for Seaside Arbor Day celebration to be on April 18th. However, the tree board uh is celebrating uh through the dedication of the uh of the arboritum at the museum and that will happen on May 29th. So we get to

that's okay. That's okay. And so in the city then we get to celebrate twice. Whereas in 1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees. And whereas this holiday called Arbor Day was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska. And Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and world. And whereas trees can be a solution to combat climate change by reducing the erosion of our precious top soil by wind and water, cutting heating and cooling costs, moderating the temperature, cleaning the air, producing lifegiving oxygen, and providing habitat for wildlife. And whereas trees are a renewable resource, giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires, and countless other wood products. And whereas trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community, and trees wherever they are planted are a source of joy and spiritual renewal. And whereas the city of Seaside has been designated as a Tree City USA by the National Arbor Day Foundation for 28 consecutive years and will be commemorating Arbor Day at the Seaside Arboritum, an event sponsored by the city tree board and held at the Seaside Museum. Now therefore, I, Steve Wright, mayor of the city of Seaside in the state of Oregon, do hereby proclaim April 18th, 2026 as Seaside Arbor Day celebration and urge all citizens to support efforts to care for our trees and woodlands and to plant trees to gladden our hearts and promote the well-being of present and

future generations. Thank you. and we'll all get invitation to the celebration at the end of May.

Uh it's time for public comments. Members of the public may use this time to provide general comments on matters not scheduled elsewhere on the agenda for public hearing or public comment. Individuals wishing to speak should complete a public comment registration card like this. They're over there on the desk or table. Uh, and submit it to the city recorder before being called. That's Kim over there. This time is intended for the council to listen to public comments rather than engage in discussion. The council may consider whether issues raised during this time should be scheduled for discussion or action in a future meeting. Each speaker is allotted three minutes. And it looks like we will have another one. Um, first one up though is Sheamus McVey from uh, Seaside. It's been a while since I've been at this particular mic. Uh, I was disheartened this week to see multiple public statements from a uh, county commission candidate stating that Seaside is apparently being overrun by multiple gangs uh, to include some of the more violent sects of the Nortenos, the Serenos, and the Latin Kings as well as multiple drug cartels apparently. Now, I realize this is something better directed towards our police department than to the city council, but as a matter of public interest, as this would be public safety as well as a a candidate for a public office making these claims, I'm really hoping that either the council or uh our police chief can address these claims for the public knowledge um at some point

tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Our chief um heard your words, so we'll uh see if he has something to say about in the future. Um Ken Norris from Seaside.

Uh good evening. Uh my name is Ken Norris and with my wife TJ, uh we moved to Seaside last fall and happily own a house uh over on 10th Avenue. To begin, I want to thank all of you on the council for your service to the city and its residents. TJ and I also believe in service to our community, our nation, and our world. We volunteer at the Seaside Food Pantry. We have begun the process of volunteering at Seaside Schools. We make a point of supporting local businesses. In honesty, we drink way too much coffee with Michelle at Seaside Coffee Roasters. When we moved here after completing our working careers and two years serving as PeaceCore Thailand volunteers, we picked Seaside because we loved the beach, loved the town, and loved the vibe of this community. We met our neighbors, we've met many locals, city employees, we've met many of you, and felt this was a friendly and welcoming community. However, over the last few months, we have come to question how much of a friendly and welcoming comm community this is. What we have come to realize is that there are opposing factions and hateful personal agendas that are leading to a dysfunctional community. And we believe your actions, your internal conflicts, your words are not helping overcome these factions, these personal agendas, this dysfunction. I am here to urge you, each of you, to set an example for your constituents to follow, to listen to opposing views, to politely disagree, but to always keep in mind the good of the entire community and not simply the vocal and maybe

privileged few. I urge you to be the leaders we need and know you can be. Thank you. Thank you. Good words. Have no others. So, we'll move on. A declaration of any potential conflict of interest with something on the agenda tonight. Hearing none. I have a motion for the approval of our consent agenda. So moved. Second. Council President Morsy and Councelor Baker. All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Excuse me. Motion carries. Mentioned Pacific Power um being very generous to donate money towards our arboritum project and we have uh our local head of uh uh PG uh PPNL um did I say PGE? No, you didn't. I didn't. I come from Portland. It was PGE there. So, so we're going to hear tonight uh about um the LED um conver street light conversion project. Welcome.

Thank you. Thank you. power all over the colleague Kelly from Pacific company and look at this kind ofational lens. What is the foundation of street does as does an LED conversion entail? What are the benefits? What are some of the challenges um that you may be hearing from community members? And and we'll cover all of that. Um I guess I have the clicker here. So provide an overview of the city of seaside street lighting. I see it as my responsibility to help educate you on this. Uh share the benefits of converting the existing street lighting to LED. Educate on the why and how LED uh conversion can reduce costs, improve public safety, support sustainability, um and other goals that the council may have, and then help the city move this forward if um if that's what you decide to do. Um just for for some background the current lighting infrastructure within the city of Seaside there are 647 street lights. So these are comprised overhead street lights and posttop lights. Um there are 532 high-pressure sodium lights, 15 mercury vapor lights,

100 existing LED lights throughout the city totaling 647. These are all owned and maintained by Pacific Core. So Pacific Power you'll see servicing these. Um it allows us to streamline maintenance, standardize the equipment that's used and ensure reliable and consistent operation on power poles. So the alternative would be if say the city owned them and the city maintained them through public works. But most municipalities have turned to um the electrical utility to provide the service. And um the benefits of this are that you get a predictable rate from the utility through the tariff. you utilize existing infrastructure. So, you're using existing utility poles to place street lighting on and you're leveraging a skilled and um qualified workforce through the the power company to maintain and and um operate those lights. The LED conversion is an opportunity in front of the city of Seaside. There are a couple other communities looking at this as well in the in the county. Um, but the goal is to convert 574 high-pressure sodium and mercury vapor lights. So, those ones that aren't already converted to LED. Um, the reasons for this, their high energy consumption. Um, right now we replace the le the light fixtures when they go out. This would be a full-scale conversion of those 547. So, you have consistent equipment across the city. Um, it all happens at once. So, that's very efficient to do. And if we do them peacemeal, it tends to be increase the volatility of those outages. So you see a street light out, maybe takes a while for somebody to report it, then it takes a while for the crew to get out there and then it gets, you know, you have this kind of peacemeal ongoing um response. And then you have uh public safety and visibility issues because of the duration. You know, I know that on

in Gearhart where I live, there was a street light out for months and nobody reported it until we somebody find, you know, I actually finally called it in and said there's a street light out. And so the public safety increased visibility for community. Sometimes people see street lights out and they don't know whose responsibility it is. So it just continues on and that continues to be an issue. And then there's increased repair costs um to rate payers and we can go into what some of those costs are but ultimately it's not inflation resilient or resistant um to do that peace meal. Doing it all at once kind of locks that in. Um at present the highpressure sodium lights and mercury vapor lights are not technically dark sky compliant. Um and the city's always locked into a higher per kilowatt hour rate. And I'll go into that in a bit more about what that means. And these are the two types of lights that we're talking about. On the left is the overhead light. I did bring an example if anybody wants to see you at an LED light. I heard that in the budget meeting. Um and the posttop level two. So pretty straightforward. And you'll now drive around the city just like I have staring at lights trying to determine is that a high-pressure sodium light or is that an LED light. So these are the GE functional Cobra lights that are being proposed for the conversion and the ones on the right are the posttop. Um

can I ask you though? Sure. But we do currently have other light fixtures in our array here in the city because I've been out looking and I see two other things that don't look like either one of those. So there are do they look more similar to the ones on the left? but they're kind of thinner. Yeah,

this is an example and that's part of what we've talked about and Kelly if you're on you can also chime in. Um that that ongoing this these are the GE functional Cobra lights that are part of this conversion proposal because that's what is being acquired all at one time as we do peace meal. The goal to keep rateayers rates lower is we buy what is available at the time. So, in our store, you know, back in Warrington where we have our um all of our materials stored, when I went back to look at street lighting, there are many different varieties of street lighting, but this is what is being proposed for the city for this conversion. It will not replace existing LED lights. So, there will still be some inconsistency, but over time, those potentially do get swapped into this type or whatever is most cost effective at that moment. But but yeah, there are a couple different looks to them. Um, LEDs are much more efficient at turning electricity into usable light. Um, an LED can produce the same lumens at using far fewer watts of electrical power. Um, watts now tell you cost and energy. They don't actually tell you brightness of LEDs. So, that's something different just in terms of the nomenclature. So, for an example, a 100 watt legacy light is 9,000 to 10,000 lumens. LEDs, you speak in lumens, not necessarily in in that wattage. Um, and so the the corresponding LED producing the same uh light or lumens would be that 35 to 60 watt. So, you won't see a 100 for 100. You'll see 100 watt. And we'll really look at the lumen, you know, the lumens of the light fixture versus the wattage. So, same visibility, lower energy use, and then on the on the the the lumens use a Kelvin scale. So, what we're looking at with this with the what's being proposed um what the city has the opportunity to take advantage of on the

on the conversion is either a 3000K lumen light the um or 4,000 3000 is what is dark sky compliant. um what we do. So I think it's important to state out that um that the city is the one who determined what the what the wattage or you know what the brightness of the lights were originally. That wasn't something that Pacific Power determined. It really was the city saying this is what we're going to place. We placed it and now what we're trying to what the goal of this is is to propose you know like for like. So if it was producing this amount of lumen, we're going to identify a light fixture that is the same level of brightness. So what you see here on the left is those 547 light fixtures throughout the city. So a high-pressure sodium 70watt bulb is now consider being considered for a level one LED. And you can go through the the full list. This is all in a proposal that's been proposed that's been given to the city. But on the right hand side of this slide, I thought it was interesting so that you could understand the placement. So a level one LED is really in the middle of a block. So you know, just more for street lighting and public safety. Level two would be a slower intersection. Level three, again, a slower intersection. Level four is a busy main road. Level five is highway and public safety spaces. Level six, same thing, highway and public safety spaces, and then an area light. So, the prom lights are currently at level five um because of the desire to light that area for um public safety. That was determined by the city, you know, long ago and those lights have been converted. There's um currently four prom lights that are at LED level 5. We

have not had any complaints, obviously open to discussion. Those four lights that have already been converted are not part of this conversion um proposal. Those will continue to be level five lights. If the city decides to replace them, that would be outside of this conversion proposal that we have. But it's always an option. If you decide that you want to go down to a level four or you know that kind of thing, we can have that conversation. Um but again this what we look at is when we developed the proposal for the city was just like for like you know it wasn't um it was not a subjective exercise on our part. Um, and then the lights on Highway 101 in the city as well as the lights on 7th in Franklin are level twos. And so that is I know that has come up as a question, but that can give you an idea if you want to look at what if you wanted to view what's in the, you know, if you wanted to go personally take a look at what's at 7th and Franklin or any of these on the prom to see what that brightness is and what the comparable aspect is. Do you have any idea what level it is on Mechanicum Drive?

I could find out. I'd like to know. Thanks. Of course. Yeah. And so does I was just going to say, does Pacific Power currently do the prom lights as well? Because I was under the impression those were city Well, there's two kinds of lights on the prom. There are the Pacific Power lights, but then there are the cityowned lamp posts. And I was going to ask about that because I don't think you're including the city-owned lamp posts in any of your numbers. Not that I'm aware of, but I can find out on that. But I do know the concrete posts, we maintain those posts as well as the lights on those posts because we are looking those are the city lamp posts. No, not the city lamp post. The the actually the post are also Yes.

Yes. But but it's surprising to me that the post that the street lights are on the the arked one those aren't concrete. Some of them are because we have Yeah. We have pictures of them and some of them are, you know, certainly in need of repair and that is something it's our responsibility on them. But the but the historic the historic appearing lamp posts, those are all citymaintained, city-owned, etc. Because those are on our bridges, they're on mechanicum and they're on the prom. There are some posttop. There's 13 posttops. I will find out where those posttops are that where those are planning on being placed.

And I think that the concern here is that we have a um heritage lamp that is iconic to the city that we don't necessarily want to replace with right those two options. I don't if there and if there is a way I think so we want to differentiate the two if if they are differentiated but then also if there is a model for that to be converted to LD LED and have it directed downwards instead of out we'd like to look at that without sacrificing the style of the lamp.

Yeah and we can you know I mean that's certainly something to to look at. Yeah, happy to follow up. I've lost my ability to um so part of this conversion that I think is very important is to understand how PC how power the street lights um are paid for. Currently, street lighting operates under rate schedule 51. And rate schedule 51 is um it broken out into a couple different categories. But what we're proposing here, and it's not necessarily us proposing, this is just the opportunity for cities to take advantage of what opp what

Oh, Kelly, do you want to con Oh, I just wanted to just um I've got a picture up. I don't know if I can share if somebody can allow that, but I wanted to just make sure from your um discussion about the city own decoratives just to show you the difference of where ours is versus yours um are specific to the prom. I don't know if I can have that allowed with who's controlling and I can share. It doesn't sound like that's a possibility, but maybe I could follow up with the city afterwards, Kelly, if that's okay. Yep.

Thank you. Um, so rate schedule 51 as I was saying is utility funded and that's where you're that's what the city of Seaside currently is under rate schedule 51 utility funded. So it means that we funded originally the lighting infrastructure and therefore you pay a rate that's includ that that is based on that. We do all of the ongoing replacement of poles, heads, lamps, photo cells, the service wire both overhead and underground. Um we provide the replacement of LED fixtures over time and the city pays for the energy use at the highest kilowatt hour in that rate schedule. Um that's just part of what the Oregon tariff from the regulatory um entities is rate. What is what part of this conversion process in Oregon is that for municipalities that move forward with these conversions, it moves into what's considered the customerf funded rate schedule on that schedule 51. So it leverage it allows the le the city to leverage the energy trust of Oregon incentives that I'll show you in a little bit what those are, but also very importantly allows you to move into a lower rate schedule. a per kilowatt hour rate schedule um in perpetuity for all of those light fixtures that are replaced during this conversion. Um and then we continue to maintain them the same as before. Um so what I this here I know it's kind of a and you all probably have um detailed slides but this is just to give you an example of how that that energy usage cost is reduced. There is a monthly base rate on the left in the circle is the monthly base rate right now and the proposed future rates in the customerf funded are on the right. So

you can see that just in the util the per kilowatt hour rate um is about 25 to 35% less on an ongoing basis plus you use less electricity with the LEDs. So you have both the rate decrease as well as the usage decrease that contributes to the overall savings. And the estimated annual savings through this conversion is expected to be about 18,000 $18,593 for the city annually in savings both through the rate adjusted adjustment as well as the energy usage. Um these are just some of the pros and pros of moving to LED. Um definitely increase uh in public safety. It's interesting learning a little bit more about how LEDs really enhance color and the ability for public safety to see if that's a red car that's speeding by or somebody that ran off in a brown shirt. Um those those certainly contribute to improved visibility, safer streets, uh traffic and pedestrian control. Certainly if you have um you know clearer streets, more uniform lighting, you have better opportunities to um you know just maintain public safety, cost control, maintenance efficiency, especially since you'll have more uniformity across all of the infrastructure, sustainability, equity, and access. It means that throughout the city there's uniformity in the in the level of electric um the level of lumens, the ability to support your dark sky initiatives, um potential liability reduction and economic vitality in the city. One thing that has come up is directionality with lighting and the how do you deal with how do you address some of the concern over the brightness or

the potential brightness within the city? And so this is an example of the shielding and I brought an a light a shield to show you what it looks like. But this is the kind of shielding that can be placed on the lights. And we encourage and I'll go through this at the end as well, but we encourage the city to manage this pro this this component of it because say you have neighbor on the left, neighbor on the right, neighbor across street, busy intersection. We encourage the city to and really require the city to manage the shielding program to help, you know, make sure that one customer is not calling us and we're all of a sudden shielding an intersection to keep lied out. But it is an option and there's lots of different ways to do the directionality of shielding. So that is certainly an option that is available to the city.

Is that the only style of shield you have? Well, as you can see on the diagram here, this is the kind of shields that are available for this particular light fixture that is being proposed for this. Can multiple shields be put on one light? Well, it no. So, it's really designed to do house side or house side, front, street side, but you can't have one shield and one shield, right? Yeah. Because you have neighbors on either side. So there might be an opportunity somewhere to manage the uh direction of that light.

Yeah. And I think that is one of the reasons we really encourage the city to manage that program because you go out, you assess it, you you know are in a better place to make a decision as to what best serves the city and your community versus us making that call. So there are other accessories, shade accessories that will

these are the shade accessories here listed on the spreadsheet on the PowerPoint that are available for this light fixture, not just this one, but these are the options. So side shields, front shields, back shields. One of the things that we have and we have found is that it we encourage municipalities to give 3 to six months after an LED conversion takes place to implement a shielding program particularly because it can be a little overwhelming at first because change is hard and all of a sudden it feels brighter, seems brighter. But sometimes over time people can learn to adapt to and then just start to understand that it is it just you start to adapt to it. So, not to say that there aren't con valid concerns out there, but this is something that we encourage municipalities to give it to ask their communities to give them a little bit of grace time and then set up a shielding program.

Jess, I have a follow-up question. Yeah. So um is this with the shielding is this something then when you say us manage that mean our public works will go and make changes or even install them in the first place? No, we would take care of installing it. What we would encourage you to do is have maybe a page on your website where somebody could submit a shield request and then you would assess those on an ongoing basis and determine and contact Pacific Power and we would order the shield and install the shield based on the city's specifications.

Okay. And then do you guys have like what would be really difficult is to have you know 500 different customized ways to do it. What would is there a recommendation for a best practice that we can kind of encourage as a starting place and the reasons why we want it a certain way. And so then it's maybe a higher bar than a fickle person change it and six months later change it back or something like that. Just trying to manage the number of those requests that come in.

Yeah. Yeah. And I think I we can certainly sit down with the staff and with you and design what the best approach is. You know, if we wanted I don't Yeah, I agree. You're not going to want to just open it up and say shield, you know, open shields for days, but we could, you know, we could certainly look at what some of the best practices are out there. I could see this as an opportunity to promote com uh neighborhood collaboration and neighborhood discussions about this before uh build that into the process and I think that builds community as well.

Yeah. I think going back to one thing Jessica said though is is I think people will all have opinions on this before they see it. And so part of it is putting it in let people getting adjusted and then having some of those so that's not uh they go into it with we already know what we want when you do the initial replacement without the shields, right? So you're saying no shields at first. Give it some time to burn in and get let people get used to it and then and then start talking about shields and start talking about shields. That's really good.

Yeah. And we, you know, we we collect the, you know, we get the calls, too. And so we're we can share that information about where we're getting calls, you know, complaints or concerns with from the community, you know, and and you use that as both the opportunity, exactly like you're saying, to have community conversation, but also directly with the city on this. And ultimately, the shields do have a cost to them. So that's also something the city would want to be conscious of is that each shield is 40, you know, in the 40ish dollar range, but then there's labor associated with that and that would be a cost to the city. So you you want to manage that as well.

In some of the neighborhood communities, there's already a um request for shielding and they're still waiting. So when these um and not for you, but when these lights become changed, should they do so, um I think that the shielding request is still going to be there. Yeah. And did you say there's no way? Sorry, I just missed what you said. No, in some of the neighborhoods, uh mine in particular, you know, the lights need some shielding. Okay. Yeah.

So, what I'm saying is that they already need some shield shielding. So when the lights are changed, there shouldn't be really a lot of uh downtime before those shields go in place. Unless of course there there's different color or lighter less light. Oh yeah, that everything it's the basic is going to change. So um maybe what comes from that is also going to be modified or could be modified. So yeah, that and that's a question that I had with regards to the level for the neighborhoods. You said the prom lights are at level five and do you know what the levels are for the neighborhoods?

Yeah, I that previous slide that I had that showed is um No, the one with the table. There you go. Yeah. So right here on the right hand side when we went through this process of determining which lights would qualify for which replacement we can certainly look at particular neighborhoods and say okay we have can you provide like a map of the city that kind of ask that question and I I I'm I think it would be complex for us to necessarily do that but we can certainly look at you know these are the if there are particular addresses we want to look at we can do and I'll work on seeing whether Thank you. Yeah, cuz I

So the level is the mid block. Which one is that for the uh for the communities for the neighborhoods? What level is that? Level one. So on the right hand side, level one is midblock. So if you went to 7th in Franklin, which is an intersection, that's level two. Great. Thank you. Yeah. And just by the bulk of the numbers, obviously most of the lights are level two. Yeah, they're right in including the LEDs. Mhm. I don't know if everybody else had the same issue, but we kind of didn't like LEDs when they first came out. And now, you know, we're well, we're basically forced. We have to use them and we're well used to them. You figure out what you want to do where, and

you just because you didn't have any choice. Yeah. Right. If you wouldn't mind going to the slide with Thank you. that one. And to your point, Mayor, it seems like Ultimately, CE said we'll all be LEDs eventually.

We have to eventually that is what the replacement path is forward. The reason that you have this opportunity in front of you to convert now is because there are incentives from the state to do so. Um the seaside qualifies for LED conversion cash incentives from the energy trust of Oregon which is paid for by the rateayers in Oregon already. So these incentives are there to help municipalities make this move faster. Um and then the immediate benefit of the reduced schedule 51 rates because you cannot get those rates unless you go through this customerf funded conversion process. So if you know you have both the cash incentives through ETO as well as the reduced rate schedule that will contribute to the economic vitality of the community. Ultimately, you will have LEDs in throughout the community over time. Yeah. So, this is the um project quote the the lighting conversion cost for moving to LEDs in this with the um 5 I think 47 lights. It's $118,425. The Energy Trust of Oregon incentives are about 49% of that cost. So, this is cash that the city will get back directly from Energy Trust. And then the total city cost for the LED conversion is 60,797 after those ETO cash incentives. The estimated, if you remember back to that slide where I said what the estimated annual cost savings for the LED conversion would be about $18,593. So it'd be three little over three years to get these the lights paid off and then you're in perpetuity for all of these lights in that lower rate

schedule. All right. What um is another part of that computation though is the extra cost of the shades. And I what immediately came to me is we take the savings and we put it aside should we need to do shades. And that of course is then going to and the shades are part of the investment. Yeah.

So that means that 3.27 two seven years is probably going to be more like six years on the return on investment uh depending on the number of shades we have to have. But I think we need to plan for that and um and think about that as we go into this. Sure. And we can give the city manager more information on what you know what that potential shield costing could be because we know the cost of the shields in present dollars. Who knows where things go in the future? But also without labor, the estimated labor could be.

Let me let me ask you something else. Is the city able to as we go into the program and we know which lights, which lamp posts have what level lighting.

Is the city able to review that and change it? And does that make any difference on the cost? Yes, the city has the opportunity because again this is the municipality saying this is the light fixture that we want in these areas and we are matching the like to like. This is an opportunity to review that and look at whether there's any, you know, outliers. I mean, for the most part, I would anticipate that the city has made really good decisions about where to place lighting and what lumens they needed in lighting. But if there are outliers where we're getting complaints or you're getting, you know, public comment that's significant about particular lighting, then absolutely let's look at those outliers and review what you end up ordering because ultimately you're funding what this looks like. So let's, you know, before you decide to move through the conversion, look at that spreadsheet and say, okay, we want to move these from level two to level one and look at some of these aspects. And then there are we would just adjust the proposal. This would, you know, if we changed the lighting on it, it could go up slightly or down slightly just depending on what it looks like. I don't think it would be material though, right?

Yeah. One thing I wasn't clear about from the presentation is are when we're doing an LED upgrade to a light fixture, are we replacing the whole fixture or is it just the bolt? No, the whole fixture. So you can So that example that you showed us at the beginning with the fixture. So you'd actually be replacing. Yeah. You take the whole replacing fixture. Yeah. So this whole This is what electricity still comes from the same pole. So it replaces the whole fixture. So if you now you'll go Seth and

counselor you can go and if you see a high pressure sodium light you'll see that a high pressure sodium light has looks more like a light bulb inside it when you look up. So, we replace the whole head. So, that would just mount right in place where the current fixture is. Yeah. I mean, we may replace the arm and Okay. do pole repair. That little light on top, is that when it the bulbs out, does it have like a warning or is that what that is? That's the That's the Okay. That determine whether to turn it on or not. Yeah, that's the photo cell. That's just what turns it on and off the desk. It's a daylight sensor, right? Thanks, Kelly.

That's what turned. Yeah. Sensor. Um, next, the I I touched on this. The LED conversion aligns with the dark sky. If you choose there's a 3000K option and a 4,000K option. This does align with the dark sky. 3000K option is um an option and only it really focuses the light downward. You can see in some of the older high-pressure sodium light fixtures that they're actually can some of them can be rounded so the light goes more outwards versus the directionality of these.

Um and then community engagement to your uh point councelor Montero support the community needs about brightness. This isn't something we determine. This is about what the city wants for the community. we simply are here to give you this option and to implement it should you choose to proceed. Um we have seen from other communities that that just that community engagement, community communication, you know, is so critical in the entire time period leading up to and managing the roll out of it of everything from shielding to, you know, just trying to bring even more of the spirit of what we're doing with conversion and sustainability and even dark sky. This is an example of the website page on Canon Beach's website that they recently went through an LED conversion and so they have a lot more um information just about light pollution and managing you know this in your own home. So that's been very useful. We again we encourage 3 to six month grace period before doing shielding before really like immediately responding to those needs not to the needs but responding with action. certainly an opportunity to collect feedback in that time period and then again leveraging shielding to address directionality city-driven process and at the city's discretion

and you mentioned roll out. Yeah. about how long does that I'm going. Okay, good deal. All right. Um, so we encourage if you were to do a fall roll out, which would be the ideal time frame to do this

because you don't want to do it during summer when it's peak tourist season, but you don't want to do it in winter when the weather is not ideal for having it um take place. The ideal would be have a decision by July or August to move forward. takes about 10 weeks for the materials to be delivered and then we convert approximately 200 fixtures a week. So it's about a three to four week process given where we're at. Um certainly the city does not have to move forward with this now but this is the opportunity you know we've seen cost increases particularly electrical infrastructure twofold threefold. It just you know certainly we've seen the costs of everything increase. So not doing it now means that you we don't know where where the incentives will from ETO will be moving forward but also certainly the cost of you know infrastructure will most likely go up. So you'd face 2017 or beyond charges. Um what we ask from the city is that you know if there is permitting required that gets added to the project cost. So most often the municipalities wave any sort of permitting required for this. Um we will the contractor that is um doing the project will there they include flagging. So we're not asking to move away from any sort of public safety requirements by the city. We do ask the city to provide a staging site within the city and to manage the dumpsters and restrooms for the contractor during the time period and then to navigate the recycling program for it. So I I just popped up a little question. We have a couple of um developments going in.

So um this will eventually include them. They may be in the future after all this. Um I'm curious. It's my understanding that the street over by Dutch Bros where um Esparonza Village is and then uh TLC and the new uh it's my understanding that that street is a privatelyowned street and I don't know how those lights are owned but I know that those lights do not work well. They're always fritzing.

So is this going to include that area? I would have to confirm whether it'll include that area, but Kelly, could you potentially speak to the customer-owned or future development lighting?

Sure. Um, so going forward as Seaside does grow or expands their borders or does new projects, road widenings, whatever that is, if they're working with Pacific Power to do that improvement to move our infrastructure to add new um all new lighting would be at um would be LED. That's all part of what we do going forward. We just need to know I mean we would expect that Seaside would like to be the dark sky compliant lighting. So, we would obviously recommend the 3000K lighting for any new projects. Um, there is what we do is like a line extension for those costs. So, that could go either to the developer, to the city, whomever we're working with directly. Um, I'm not familiar with where Dutch Bros is. I'm actually looking at a map trying to locate it to see if I can get um a little more. Where approximately, ma'am, is that address? Actually, the address is Roosevelt Drive. Even though it runs parallel to Roosevelt, it has puzzled me for some time.

It's the area immediately south of the bridge that goes over the Nijana, the 101 bridge, 2400, 2500, something like that, crossing of Roosevelt and Wana. And I can we can follow up with the with the map and the details on that for sure. Does uh anybody else have questions? Uh just a comment. Great great job, Jessica. Great presentation. Very informative. I think I need to do some night walking and really take a look at a lot of the lights and see how bright they are because I don't I don't spend a lot of time out at night, so I don't have a good gauge. Um can we get this presentation sent to us so we can look at this? The city has it. Yeah. Yeah.

Thank you. Yeah. And um one thing I wanted to find out was with regards to flickering. I know there's in invisible flickering with the frequency of these LEDs that can cause uh challenges for people. Um are there excuse me are there going to be any um drivers in place to reduce that flickering or stop any kind of invisible flickering that's going on?

We've actually had that tested with our current product line. Um, we actually did a project. So, I'm in Salt Lake City, Utah, and we did a project just north of Salt Lake, and had a gentleman that had swore up and down that hit the um, uh, the readings from the LEDs were impeding him from being able to use his garage door opener so that you were getting the frequency overlap. So, we actually went and tested all the lines. We went and did all I mean, very thorough for almost a half mile radius from his home and all the new lighting we put up. Turns out he just needed a new battery in all of his devices. It was and he was very kind and he was very apologetic that we' kind of gone through the exercise, but we have actually not experienced any interference with our LED line that we're currently. The drivers right now as far as the technology are coming out in a seventh generation. That is what we're starting to align with as far as our vendor. They are very robust. They are very much not the LEDs that originally hit the market. You know, we're talking now almost 20 years ago. So, as you said, LED is very common place now. We expect it everywhere we go. It's not it's not a surprise. It's more a surprise to run into towns that still have the high pressure sodium and the mismatched of what we're looking at today with trying to um bring our tech our technology up to where it should be for the time frame that we are. Um we so no there is no interference. Um the flickering we have not experienced that and with again the seventh generation those are some of the bugs that were worked out in like the second and third generation LEDs.

Okay. Um honestly I couldn't understand part of that but um it sounds like it's being mitigated. Yeah and I can certainly follow up in writing on that question. I'd like to see that please. And uh with regards to the blue light spectrum, I know that it happens on the higher Kelvin rates. Um it's not so much on the lower Kelvin rates right around 3,000 which is an you know a dark skies uh parameter which I think is really good. Um but the higher ones uh there's some blue light spectrum in there and uh that has a tendency to cause problems with uh biologicals.

Yeah. And that's why we are, you know, definitely if you want that dark sky compliance, the 3000K is the option that I would encourage you to select. Okay. Well, may I help you? Thank you. Sure. Um, you mentioned Canon Beach. When did they do it? They implemented right about a year ago is when their lights were delivered and installed. And are there others either in the county or in u you like Columbia County or Telug County?

I'm not as familiar with Colombia and Tilma County because those are PUDs and so I I'm not as familiar with that. So that's not part of our service territory. Um there are about farther south along the coast. uh Lincoln City looked at doing the conversion, but they had some um changes at their at the city level and so that will likely be something that they look at. Uh city manager issues, they have a new city manager, Mr. is great. So, better shape now. Yeah. Um and then there are a couple other municipalities locally that are looking at I'll have a chat with both Canon Beach and Lincoln City.

Oh, good. Um, and it just I'm curious, uh, maybe Spencer, this is a question more for you. The lights that we've got in our parking lots, would they be part of this? You know, the the ones that are really tall, really up there or are those city own? Get get back to you. My guess is that they're city owned, but I don't I don't know. That's where that question. We can get more details on where the locations are. Sounds good. Yeah, we have all that information. Okay. But if they're not LED, you're going to have to change them sooner or later anyway. Yeah. And it it would seem like this would be a good time to do it. Might as well

if you're getting money out of somebody else. I always appreciate it when somebody else helps pay for it. Right. Well, if there's any other questions, please let me know. Here's my contact information. Kelly is out of Salt Lake, as she mentioned. We have an Oregon Pacific Power uh lighting project manager that I work with directly. She couldn't be here today, but um we certainly happy to answer any questions and continue the learning process with you all.

So, just to reiterate what you were saying about the timeline is that it takes you all about 10 weeks to get the uh the items. Yes. So, if we want to be doing this in the fall, we need to be making a decision by middle of summer. Yes. July, early August. That's where we all have to sit on that. Okay. Great. It's in your proposed budget. So, that's Oh, that's right. Okay. There. So, wonderful. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I don't think I ever actually introduced you or you didn't say your name either. So, thank you very much, Jessica.

Jessica Newhall Newh Hall. And uh uh we will be getting back to you. Thank you.

And if anybody uh out there or watches this wants to know anything else, call Spencer. Well, look at that. Okay, moving on. Um, we still have vacancies on boards, commissions, and committees. Airport advisory. We had an application for community center commission that wasn't acted on yet. uh we want to take any action on that. We still have three vacancies and they can't transact any actual business yet,

right? Um I believe that um I don't know did Julia get a hold of you or not, Kim. Um Julia and I talked about it. Julia is one of the community center commission members and um what she was hoping is that um we could have Kim invite um Karen to attend a meeting if she is continues to be interested um at this point. Um and and so that would mean that Karen might attend the next um meeting at the beginning of May. Um, as Karen has, as as we understand it, has never been in the community center, has not attended a meeting, um, and and might have more questions that could be answered if she came to a community center meeting. So, um, so Julia was going to do that, but given now, maybe we can, um, ask Kim to put that invitation out to Karen. The only thing that I had seen from Julia was she sent you all an email.

Yes. The only thing I've seen and she and I discussed that email and that's when we were talking about her asking that that a um an invitation be made for Karen to attend a meeting if she was interested. That's what you would like me to do as a count your council is asking me to do. I would be glad to do that. I'd like to propose that for the council to to proceed with that.

We have uh not ever put that on somebody before as far as I know. Um is there a particular reason we should do it now other than just point her and and let her take part in it?

I guess I don't understand the question fully. Yeah, I don't understand why it's a council decision. It's just about about I mean she applied for the job and generally we don't uh turn down volunteers. Oh, I see what you're saying. Okay. I think that it comes from um I mean she Yes. She didn't have any experience with it at all. She just thought it'd be a good place to jump in.

And and it wasn't just experience. it was that she didn't really maybe understand what the what the community center was. Um, and this would give her an opportunity to have more understanding about really what is the community center and who does it serve and what do commission members um uh what kind of things they would be involved in and talking about. and this an opportunity to give her a little more education about what she's volunteering for.

In all transparency, I had no idea until I got on the board what was going on over at the uh at the Bob. So, once I got there, I started um finding out more and more about it. Um I'm big fan of having the opportunity for somebody to go there and talk to the people who are on the board to get more information. Absolutely. And uh along with the mayor, I I don't think we should turn down any person who's interested in being a volunteer. Yeah, I'm struggling with that as well, especially with the feedback we got from a constituent, you know, regarding somebody's willing to volunteer. Why wouldn't you bring them on board? Got a motion.

I need a motion. Yes. Motion in a second if we're going to do anything. Otherwise, I mean, the idea of just inviting her to attend a meeting before she gets in and gets applied um gets uh confirmed to it, you know, that's always a good thing. We certainly encourage people to do that um even before they apply just so they can see what it's like 100%. But we have never specifically required that in the past. Okay. So, seeing as we don't have that specifically, she's always welcome to do that still. But I move to nominate Karen Miller to the to appoint her

to appoint Karen Miller to the um community center commission. Community center commission. Thank you. I'll second that. It's councelor Baker, Council President Morrisy. Further discussion? All those in favor say I. I I. Any opposed. I will say no. Motion carries. Karen Miller is appointed to the community center commission. We have two vacancies on the planning commission. We got an application from Mark Hopman. Would somebody like to nominate him? I'd like to move to set up an interview. Mark Hman.

I second. Uh, councelor Council President Morsy, I heard councelor Monttero first. All those in favor say I. I.

I. Any opposed? Motion carries. And we have one vacancy still on transportation advisory. Unfinished business. Zach come up and uh very quickly uh let us get this taken care of. Now, a member of the council that uh we are just accepting it. We can't say it's approved or anything like that. That's the job of the auditor and we can't say whether we like it or not. We're just accepting it. That's right. It is a good report, though.

Well, I appreciate that. Uh evening, mayor and council. I'm here tonight. I talked to you um a little bit at the work session early about the findings within the audit report. Uh typically this is where Rick would sit here and sing your praises, but again he apologizes for being able to be here. Um but so I I formally put before you the um audit reports for the city of Seaside and the Seaside Urban Renewal Agency uh for acceptance. Council, any discussion? Not may I have a motion to accept the 20 2425 audit report.

I'm moved. Wow. Okay. Uh let's see. Councelor Baker and Council President Morrisy. Any further discussion about the motion? All those in favor say I. I I Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. One more in the books. One more.

That was always a great time for me when that final audit was done. I presented it to the board. Okay. Ordinance 20262, an ordinance amending our fireworks ordinance. Um, city manager, would you give us a quick recap and then I'll see if there's any member of the public that wants to u make comment on it.

Sure. Um, so, uh, for the public, um, the city has had, uh, some long-standing issues with illegal fireworks being used in the community. So, previously the city council convened an ad hoc committee to evaluate different options and they recommended stronger enforcement tools, which is what we're considering tonight as uh with uh escalating penalties as well as um uh additional communications to tie in with the enforcement. Previously, the city council conducted a work session discussion on the topic and completed its first reading. And so, uh, since that time, uh, I've been able to get feedback from our city attorney. And so, the changes tonight reflect, um, that, uh, input. As a reminder, here's the timeline that we're working within. Uh, ordinances take effect within 30 days after adoption. We would like to have something in effect prior to the July 4th, uh, 2026 holiday. So the final adoption must occur by May 11th, 2026, which would be the last meeting in order to get those this approved within the 30 days. So upcoming meetings, we have our meeting tonight. We have one scheduled for April 27th. Um so tonight it's is scheduled for a second reading, possibly a third reading adoption if you're ready, but there's no need to do that if you don't want to. um we can do an additional reading on the 27th and May 11th would be the final opportunity for adoption. So here are the I just want to just touch on the changes since the previous discussion with the council. They relate to the penalty structure uh the the um discussion of egregious conduct uh and judicial discretion and the other things

are are minor changes. So, the first thing, and this is probably the most important thing, um the city attorney recommends that we make a change. So, right now we have a penalty structure that is a three tier, tier one, two, and three. And the the attorney recommends having two tiers plus an enhancement provision. So under the third one, it would go your first offense and then it would be your second offense or after a warning. And then there was a third level which included egregious behavior. And there was some concern that it was a little it wasn't specific enough. Is it after the is it on the third attempt that you can be egregious? When does egregious come in? So, some of this was to to clear it up, but also I think some of this is to provide a more defensible approach. Uh, under the previous approach, the maximum fine was $5,000. So, the updated approach is to have two levels with the enhancement. So, the first um base violation would be $1,000. A repeat violation or uh would be $3,000. And then there is a $1,000 enhancement for egregious conduct. And I'll go into what that is defined as a little bit later, but that can be tacked on to either the base violation or the repeat violation. So that has to do with if you're shooting it off into a crowd, into a structure, things like that, and it defines it that could be added on whether it's your first or second um attempt at doing that. And then she recommends that the maximum fine be $4,000. And um it's recommended that this is the most defensible if you want to have um kind of a set amount with

less kind of discretion being applied. Um I'll talk a little bit more about that. Spencer, can I clarify back on that for just a second? So in the updated approach, let's say it's your first violation. It's egregious. That's 2,000. And then you do it again tomorrow. That's a repeat. That's 5,000 right there. So, how do you No, the sec the the repeat would be $3,000. And if it was egregious again, you would add another $1,000 on it for $4,000. 1,000 goes away. Yeah. That doesn't get included in the max.

So, the max fine is is this is a per occurrence. If if it's two separate days, these are totally separate things. So, the max fine is for each time you have an encounter with a police officer. So, it could even be the same day and if you got a violation and you were fined $1,000 or $2,000 with the enhancement and then you were found doing the same thing an hour later, that's a separate I'm with you. Fine. Thank you.

Otherwise, I don't know how we would distinguish all of them, but good question. I'm glad you asked that. Um so why change from the previous three tier to the new one? Uh one is there's a simpler structure uh for officers in the field for the individual cited and for the municipal court. It's just very clear your first offense $1,000, second offense is $3,000 and then there's the enhancement. So it avoids the ambiguity that was there with the third tier and it allows the as I said the egregious conduct to apply to both a first violation or a repeat violation and the opinion there is it improves the legal defensibility of the maximum um of the the fine amounts. So uh talking about egregious conduct. So now it would be an enhancement not a separate tier. So it would apply when there's a risk to persons, a risk to pets or property, a risk to emergency responders. Examples include near structures, discharge into crowds, fire risk conditions. So the change previously, it's a separate tier. Now it's a $1,000 enhancement. So why this matters? Um obviously an egregious conduct can occur occur on the first or the repeat. Um so I think it allows for the right amount of flexibility in the field on the the the conditions and um I think for our officers which prefer good guidance I think it provides that in there. But also, um, this isn't a good example, but let's let's use the example of Canon Beach, cuz they they looked quite a bit at Canon Beaches, who they also represent. Since Canon Beach is an

outright ban on all fireworks, it's a little different. So, for example, they have their tiered approach because a sparkler is prohibited. So, you don't want to give the $5,000 fine to the kid with the sparkler. And so, we want the same things here. We want depending on the circumstances on the ground to determine if there is something egregious going on that there's an option there but it's not necessarily required. It would depend on the circumstances. Um so it gives some flexibility there without getting into the other more rigid tier structure. This is the I think the next question that obviously comes up $4,000 versus $5,000. Um, so there are two approaches to the penalties. Uh, what's recommended from the attorney is that we do the what's the $1,000 for the first offense, $3,000 for uh repeat offenses and then with the $1,000 egregious upgrade, if you will. That's a maximum of five $4,000. It's clear, it's consistent, it's predictable. if we wanted to, the council wants to keep the $5,000 amount. Um, that was I think we got the dollar amount from Canon Beach. Um, however, their ordinance is different in the fact that it's all fireworks and so it's not exactly apples to apples. And so, um, if we wanted to do that, then we would want to change it from defined find amounts to maximum fines amounts that each of the fine amounts say not to exceed. And so when a whether it's a first, a second, or an egregious conduct, we're giving the maximum and then there is some discretion in there for the officer citing it and then more discretion for

the court. And so the issue there is um where criminal law may have some components to it that are you're trying to prevent certain behaviors and whatnot. Under civil, which this is, it's not meant to be punitive. So it's it's based to be more representative of the actual harm incurred. So, when there's costs incurred wi with with uh with um having to enforce this or having to respond to these issues, it's tied a little bit more to that. And so, there isn't as much flexibility on um on a civil thing. We couldn't just come out and say it's a $25,000 penalty. That likely wouldn't hold up in court as defensible. And so, um, if we do want the higher amount, then the recommendation is it needs to have more flexibility in there so that the person who does come to court with $5,000 fine, um, it's not just some automatic thing that it was their third offense or something like there's there's justification built into it. So, it would allow for us to say advertise a higher maximum fine amount, but it also puts a lot more um discretion into the hands of the officers. So, talking about some of the alternatives and trade-offs. So, um, if we do the up to 5,000 allows for the higher amount, which I think helps with our enforcement in terms of what we're advertising, um, but it introduces greater discretion, so it's less predictable for people coming here. Um, there may be more variability in enforcement if different officers do it different ways. I think, um, you can ask Chief Ham. I think the preference for our police

department especially on an issue like this where um there is going to be this is kind of going to be a big issue. Um they'd rather have us tell them this is the fines that we want you to charge not hey use your best judgment and officer officer one has a very different judgment than officer two. he can provide guidance, but ultimately to have the higher fine amount um less challengeable. Um we don't want to put too much too much structure to it. Um and so that's that's problematic. Um and again, it's just more susceptible to a challenge. So, but from the attorney, both approaches are viable. This is really comes down to a policy choice for the city council. Um so uh when we get to the egregious conduct structure um fixed structure under the recommended and then the up to structure is with the alternative and I have motion language for both. So, the recommendation is to go with uh the advice which is a $4,000 uh max with um this will set the clear expectations for both the officers, individuals, the court. Um it'll promote more consistency across all um the enforcement and I think it's the most defensible. Um, so talking about judicial discretion, we had put in there some ways to have give less discretion to the court and I knew this was something specifically I requested they review closely. They did uh refine the language. Um the intent is still the same, but they believe it is it's actually simpler. I think a little bit clearer the language that's on there

that basically if the court wants to do reduce the fine, they can only do so upon a finding of good cause and it must be specific to the circumstances of of the incident. So, no longer can there be a standing order that when someone calls in or that it's reduced, there has to be an understanding of what occurred, what the circumstances are, and that there's a good cause to reduce it. So, again, trying to um have the right legislative role without stepping on the toes of our of the court. And when you say specific to the circumstances, do you mean specific to the circumstances of the infraction or specific to the circumstances of that petitioner asking that it be reduced because oh, I don't have enough money. I think it's uh uh I I I'm interpreting what I think the attorney would would say and uh it would be the circumstances of the incident not the individual. So in that case it needs to be

that's where I think justice needs to be blind. It needs to be to the fact because that's where we want the consistency. Yes. is that the same in two different individuals engaging in the same behavior will have the same fine amounts the same repercussions. Thank you.

Um there are some other revisions. Most of them uh none of them changed anything to do with the policy. It was just um legal language that our attorney preferred and either made it clarify from legal pers perspective or just read better which they all looked good to me. Nothing that changed anything that we're trying to do. Um okay. So, as a reminder, um according to the council guidelines of u conduct and basically your council policy, significant changes are allowed between the first and second reading. No significant changes can happen after the second reading. The determination of a significant changes within your discretion. And so, in your packet, I provided both the red line copy um and the clean copy. So you can see both of those.

Um, and again the there are maybe lots of little red changes that you saw in there. The real substantial changes are the three the change in the tiers, the change in the language on egregious and then the the the language change for the judicial um override if you will. Um, so council options for tonight. The recommended uh action would be a second reading of the ordinance by title only if you feel that this is where you want to go. Optional will be a third reading in adoption, but we still have two more readings if you want to consider it for those. If you want to consider the alternative of keeping it at a $5,000 maximum, fine. You can do that. We just need to update the language to a not to exceed. And I have um some mo uh motion language here if you did want to do a second reading, but uh keep that $5,000 fine amount. Um I have some language that would be appropriate for the second reading. Um so with that, I'll turn it back to you, mayor. It really is um I think the essential question is which of these two options does the council want to pursue? Uh, and I'm happy to answer any other questions.

Okay. Um, let's open it to public comment first. State your name and city of address, please.

Uh, Sheamus McVey, Seaside. Um, I read through the revisions earlier this week, uh, when the packet came out and, uh, I I really think that the stuff that I saw in there for the for the most part was really good. Um while the uh reduction in the fine feels immediately like the removal of some bite and some teeth to it. Um it's it's nothing that can't be lived with and I I think that uh I I like the end result. Thank you, Mr. Ansbro.

I like the uh fixed structure. I think it it does uh give clarity and definition and takes out any ambiguity.

Miss Oman counselor. Uh I too like the fixed option. Um and the rest of it looks good to me. So, and while you're you're coming to um both of you, um are you okay with staying at the 4,000? Yes. Okay. Councelor Montero,

um I like the fixed option. I don't have a problem with it being at the 4,000 level, but I do have quite a few little questions, so I want to start running through those. um 131.11B and you know this could have come earlier but I was reading it with a a more thought. Um do we need to define ocean shore recreation area or is that definition already somewhere? I think it's both in city code and state code. Okay. because I want to make sure that we include all the way from the shoreline to the prom.

Yes. Okay. Um and then what's not allowed there is possessing, discharging, or igniting any firecracker, explosive, torpedo, rocket, fireworks, or other similar devices. So, when I read that, I'm wondering, are we only talking, It doesn't say illegal anywhere there. Basically, that's saying you can't do anything on the beach, not even a sparkler. Yes. And that's because that's already state law. Okay.

So, um there is already a prohibition in state law for any of that that overrides anything we want to do. And so um this is more keeping it in compliance with the state law. So that's the state law and state park. That's OS 48480.111. That's that's the definition.

Okay. All right. So um then the next one um you've referred to in B you referred to OS 480.111 but in C you have not used an OS to define illegal fireworks and I do believe there is an OS that defines illegal fireworks. Yeah,

taken that meaning, you know, including anything that flies into the air, explodes, or behaves in an uncontrolled. But if there's an OS that says that, I believe we need to reference that OS. That was a discussion I had with with the attorney and she recommended this language specifically and not to use OS in this case. Um, off the top of my head, I can't remember the reason, but this is this was a this is deliberate language from the city attorney.

Okay. The reason I think it needs to reference the OS is because that's bigger than us. And um when you get to their definition, what we're saying is we're we're um doing what the OS is telling us we should do. So because um yeah, I I just think it's my preference that the OS is def is um is referenced there because that's what backs us up. Okay, we go down to 96.24 item C. Okay, let's let me read that sentence because it does not make sense. The first sentence, the fine set forth in this section are the presumptive violations of 131.11. A fine cannot be a presumptive violation. A fine is not a violation. A fine is a fine. So again,

so this says it says the the fine set forth in the section uh are the presumptive for violations? The presumptive what violations? Penalties probably should. It may be that the word uh 'the' needs to come out. The fines set forth in this section are presumptive for violations of 131.11 and

meaning these are the assumed uh fine amounts for these violations and that's where we get into the requirement for the judge to have the basis. I think you can likely I think that was something just missed in the strike through you. They're either the presumptive penalties or they are so the reason penalties were removed and you can see it throughout is the attorney prefers the word fines. That's the legal word to use. And so I'm guessing in striking through the penalties and replacing them as needed with fines. So it it

just have to remove the word 'the' in front of presumption. I would take out presumptive. The fines set forth in this section are for violations of I think presumptive is specifically supposed to be in there. That's what gives us teeth for the judge to have more the Yeah. because otherwise that sentence does not make sense. Yeah, I think that's a good catch.

Okay. And then we go down to C2. a violation occurring within a 12-month period of a documented warning by a law officer or violation shall be subject to the penalty or the fine, excuse me. Um, so what this is telling me is that if I have another violation after a documented warning or a first violation,

no. If you have a a violation after a first violation, so if you've had a warning or a first violation, now the fine is $3,000. Okay, let's go to back again. A violation occurring within a 12-month period, not after of within a 12-month period of a documented warning. So, what

or first violation? Okay, hold on. Let me finish my question. You're giving us 12 months after a warning or 12 months after a first violation. What about after a second violation in that 12 months? What about after a third violation in that 12 months? How does that 12 months run? Is it a 12 month set period or a rolling 12 month? You're This is like still leaving it way too open. You're only talking about one violation occurring after the warning or the first violation.

Yeah, I see what you're saying there. We can probably change the word first to uh prior. I was get that's what I was. So if you change that to of a prior violation Yeah. The in the intent is that if you've had a warning or a fine in the last 12 months, you're you're at a $3,000 amount,

right? Okay. Because then it doesn't say how many. I mean, if you do if you're on the third time after a prior violation, you're still going to and you're not going to it's not going to increase. you're still going to be at $3,000. And I can be okay with that. Or we had it actually increasing the more you got in the 12-month period. I can be okay as long as we are really we know it doesn't matter how many violations you have, you're going to get charged with every single one within that 12-month period. Now let's say this Fourth of July I have a violation and next 5th of July I get caught again. I'm outside that 12-month period. So I go back to the first. Is that the intent that we want?

Like that that's what the council can decide. what the previous language was. Um yeah, if you want to um you know put 14 months or something like that, I think that would that wouldn't substantially change anything here. Um basically I can have a first violation every 12 months and pay a thousand bucks. Yeah. I I think the reality is I don't think many I think those individuals likely won't come back which is kind of the the intent of this.

Uh don't forget that we are also um we'll be seizing all of their fireworks which is probably more than the fine amounts and um what this still allows is for the criminal prosecution. Uh and so now where we can't have both happening simultaneously um if we think it's more appropriate we can still follow the uh criminal which would I am not the lawyer criminal lawyer here but that you know on your record or something like that that's going to be more significant than a fine

okay I have I'll be coming back to that in another question but I think we as long as the council understands somebody can they roll back to their first violation every 12 months. You know, I want us to be really clear. We know that. In number three, it says that subject to a fine enhancement of up to an additional $1,000, who gets to decide whether it's $700 or $1,000? I think you really wanted that still to be a set fine, didn't you?

This is all of this structure is the exact word our attorney. So, this is this is from them. So, who decides whether that up to $1,000 is

as written? Then it would be uh on the I'm I'm assuming maybe chief can join in. I think that would be the individual writing the ticket. And does the individual writing ticket after they've written a ticket for $1,000 want to have to figure out, I'm going to charge you an enhancement of $400 or $750 or $1,000 and have to stand there and justify why they're writing that enhance. This is ultimately the balance and that is we we want specificity as much as possible and less discretion. Um but that will always induce a greater ability to challenge. Um, if it's exactly $1,000 for every incident and there's no concern for the specific circumstances, I think that's why the attorneys written it as such as we want as much specificity, but in some areas it's going to have an up to amount and that's the balance. So we can so instead of going a hard everything is hardcoded no discretion to lots of discretion this is this is this is the right balance that the attorney's recommending

and I don't have a problem on the basic fine you're going to get $1,000 but then I think it's egregious how egregious do you think it is and that's where we're putting the officer in the position of deciding how egregious they think something is and I'm not sure it's either egregious or it's not egregious. And I think that's where you don't have you you either have the $1,000 or you don't. If it's egregious, it's egregious. If it involves a an emergency responder, do you really want an officer having to decide how egregious that is? All I can say is that's the recommendation from our legal council to make it as defensible as possible. I guess I don't understand our council our our legal council saying in order to make it defensible make it a set fine but when it's an enhancement in order to make it defensible make it as uh uh as iffy as possible.

So I think I don't get that going together. That's what I was trying to talk about. I think what they're trying to do is find the right balance. If it is too strict, it's going to be subject to challenge because uh again, if we were Canon Beach, there's no distinction between a giant mortar and a sparkler. So that's But that's not what this is. This is egregious. Someone someone shooting uh So we say shooting into a crowd. How close is that crowd? How big is that crowd? There's lots of circumstances there and so there needs to be discretion and so do I care if it was two people that they're shooting at or five people? It's egregious.

But there's a difference because one of one of the other things they state in here is risk to pets. Okay, a risk to a pet is not the same as shooting a bottle rocket at a 2-year-old. One is more egregious than the other. So, I think if you have some wiggle room and we trust our officers to use discretion all the time. I would like to hear from our police chief on this, please. Sorry.

Oh, no problem. I was sitting there bite my lip a few times. So, the way I would be interpreting this, I might be wrong, but presumed fine for the egregious or whatever is going to be what we're going to write in there. It's the judge's call to listen to how egregious it was and make a decision whether or not that egregious $1,000 enhancement is going to be a $400 one. So, for our purposes, and the way I would rather see it, if there's still wiggle room for that, is if you're going to tell me I'm going to write somebody either a 1,000 or a $3,000 ticket for a second, third offense, and there's an egregious issue, I'm going to write them for a 1,000 and a 1,000 or a 3,000 and a 1,000. It's not our call to say how much. It's not our job to be the punitive side of things. It's enforcement. the judge makes the call on all of it saying I'm going to lower it or I'm gonna remain the same. So again, for like our traffic citations, state bail is set. Those are the presumptive fines for speeding. That's a presumptive fine for having a headlight out. We write for what is decided and then the judge takes care of any kind of mitigating factors.

So you're actually introducing a third place where this judgment would could take place and that's at the judge. And yet I'm understanding that everything that's been written here is that if the judge was to lower something, it has to it has to be based on circumstances. But I'm not understanding in this in the Hold on. am not understanding in this um in this ordinance that the fine enhancement is actually the judge's call.

Well, the fine the fine enhancement has to be decided by the officer and then it's not a matter of whether introduce or not. They would introduce it if it if it warrants it. Then what chief is saying is that the judge has the option to decide instead of where it says a maximum the judge has some discretion as to to lower it based on the circumstances the specific circumstances in that case specific finding heard. Yeah. So, if I'm understanding you, the subjectivity is not with the officer. You're going to write an egregious ticket, right?

The subjectivity would come into the behaviors, the observations. We would write our report that would have those details. If it went to a trial, we would testify that yes, this is their first offense, so they got $1,000. And these are the behaviors that were seen. They were shooting them at kids. Kids, other people. You're on the beach during Fourth of July. I don't know how you can discharge one without it being a little bit of egregious. It's fire season. There's grass around. Easy to set a fire. Those kinds of things would be narrated in the report. Testified to the judge would then make a decision upon conviction.

What are your mitigating factors, sir? Well, I whatever. But the officer would present the evidence and observations and the behaviors that they witnessed. It would be the judge's decision as to whether or not that warrants the full thousand dollar or a reduction in either one of those fines. When you or your officer is handing the person the ticket, you're not going to say, "I think this is kind of egregious, so it's only $400, right? I don't think you're going to just write the ticket." So, I think it should be the

That makes a lot of sense to me. So, and that's where I'd get some attorney feedback because I know that's what the chief wants and that's what I would want because I think it's clearer and easier. Um, but I would want to to hear from the city attorney that that is um uh defensible. She may come back and say, "I know the police department wants that, but I want to keep and even if as a practice they do that, I still want some wiggle room in there for an officer to be able to make that decision." So I think that's where um I think if you provide legal direction

and I respect what the officers are doing but I think if you provide that kind of wiggle room at the officer level you also open up um people accusing an officer of not applying it consistently or fairly based on maybe who they're giving the ticket too. And I don't want to put our officers in those positions. I think the fact I see it exactly the way you see it that the officer needs to be able to say this is the fine and this is what I'm writing. Not I I see this as a little bit egregious or or somebody accusing, hey, you only charged this guy who you know because they're a local this much while you charged me from out of town this much. I don't want to put our officers in that position.

Yeah. And I think that's where Well, first I would say officers have to use discretion all the time.

That's that's part of their job with every stop, with everything they do. So, I think they're used to that. I think they want as much guidance as possible. And I agree with the chief and I think it'll be I would prefer that as well, but if we want to make that change, I want the city attorney to sign off on it that it's defensible. I that's my only statement I'm trying to make on there is I don't think we should unilaterally change her wording there if it was put in for a specific reason. And there's nothing stopping the chief saying every time it gets into that category it's a thousand bucks period despite what the the ordinance says because it says up to

the chief can just automatically say it's going to be a thousand period. In my uh putting my my city attorney hat on I would say what we want to preserve is that there is room for extenduating circumstances and if that's with the court then that works. If it's with both, that may work as well. And I think we can get some further guidance on that, but I suspect that's what the the attorney will say. Thank you. Thank you. So, my question, who decides the amount of the enhancement? Because it says a fine enhancement of up to an additional thousand dollar.

Well, you've made your point on that one. Let's move on. I'm just Yeah. Okay. Um, if you go to E, a law enforcement officer may seize and confiscate why fireworks, does that mean that they have the discretion not to seize and confiscate?

Yeah. So, um, depending on their situation, um, if there were something more urgent happening, we don't want them to have to conf have to seize fireworks if there is a fight breaking out next door or something like that. And so, um, I think this is the proper language that we don't want to require the officers to do something in this situation, but it keeps that option open because seizing them means you also have to render them safe and so you're taking them back to the department and soaking them in water or whatever

or you're taking the officers off the street to deal with it. And so, um, I think we are giving the purpose of this is to give our officers tools to use, not necessarily to dictate exactly what tool they're going to use in every circumstance. Okay? I again do not want to put them in the position of having to justify that I didn't take those from that person because of why. So, and I don't think this is necessarily different than what they are able to do today.

Okay. Okay. Um, and then I just had sort of a generic question and that is are we able to uh, and I don't know if that's in this ordinance or somewhere else, but are we able to say um, where the proceeds of the fines would be um, used by the city? Can we say that the fines will the proceeds of the fines will be used in educating in public safety or in uh educating people about um uh about firework safety and about fireworks rules? Can we can we designate where the proceeds of the fines will be used by the city? Yeah, the city council can. Although this ordinance wouldn't be the right place to do it, what you would want to do. I mean, that's a budgetary question really is.

So, if you think of it this way, this is general fund revenue. Everything comes into one pot. And so, you pay a fine, you um you pay your property taxes, you pay a fee for a permit, it all goes into the same account. And so, um, what you're really saying is each year through the budgetary process, if we receive $10,000 in fines from fireworks, we want to in the following year budget $10,000 say for fireworks education. That's the real technical way it could happen that would serve that intent. Um and so probably the likely way to do it would be to have a resolution as such um separate from the ordinance saying the intention of the city council is to do this with fine proceeds here. That would inform staff how we put the budget together. Again, then that would be discussed during the budget committee deliberations and ultimately with the city council approval of a budget that includes that dollar amount. But I wouldn't put that in the ordinance.

We'd have to come back and change the ordinance every time we wanted to change it. No, I Yeah. I I just want us to consider that this is a good source of revenue for public safety. you know, for us to designate, you know, if we're finding you for doing this, we're going to use the money on the other side. Yeah. The only thing I would caution is

um future councils may want to do something different when with it, and people may come back and say, "Hey, you said it was you said you were doing this because the money would be used for this, and now it's this." And so I'm always going to protect the council to keep your op options open and not tie or not tie future councils not in something they're necessarily tied to but a u maybe the appearance of a public obligation if you will and so I would always encourage you to keep your options open but if you wanted to say your market that's a discretion the council has.

Okay. Okay, Riff, my only question was did you discuss the egregious kicker amount ever being more being 2,000? If if the intent originally was to get to a maximum of 5,000, was it discussed with the attorney that

I didn't discuss specifically the egregious conduct get? I just discussed if we wanted to keep to 5,000, how would we do that? And the direction was if it's going to be that high, then you need much more flexibility in there. So, it's not a one-sizefits-all. Um, and so her recommendation was just to change all the wording to up to amounts rather than set amounts. So, it wasn't specifically discussed on the egregious side. Um, I suspect, and I can go back and ask, but I suspect what she would say is you can you could change the egregious to 2,000, but then she would recommend I guess it already says up to 1,000. So, for sure, she's going to say up to 2,000.

Um, I can ask that question. Okay. Thank you.

So, I'm fine with the the language the attorneys have drafted, especially if it makes it more legally defensible. I mean, that's the whole purpose of what we're doing here. I think in reality, if we think about the 4th of July and how much there is to do for officers and how limited their resources are, that they're probably mostly going to be focused on the egregious offenses because there's going to be so many fireworks going off. So, I think that's probably where their focus will be. And I like that there's language for that. Um, I'm fine to move forward um with the the ordinance as is. except removing the 'the' that ta pointed out. Yeah,

I uh I trust our attorney to have thought this through and and fixing, you know, the uh the couple places where there was words missing or whatever is necessary. I think the idea of up to an additional thousand, you know, that's discretionary at the police and um they are if they want to always do it a thousand just so there's no question everybody gets it then okay. Um my only real question was was anything in this um very uh big change compared to what we had and yeah we've reduced the fine structure a little bit which will um make some people a little more comfortable with this. We did have some people saying 5,000 was too much. Um, but overall I'm fine with going ahead with a second reading. Um, the way it is. So, the what was the other thing I asked you guys to all make sure and tell me? Was it the 4,000?

4,000. So, yeah, the 4,000's fine with me. It was I'm assuming okay with you guys, too. Yeah, I'm okay. I was just curious if that was why that 20 thou 1,000 was determined, but it's not a deciding factor for me.

So, I'm ready for a motion. I move for a second reading of ordinance 2026-02 by title only. I'll second. It's councelor Benker and councelor Hoffman. Further discussion. We made one amendment. Do you need to say as amended? I think with the one word the removed moving the word 'the' from as Yeah. As discussed earlier. Yeah.

I move for a second reading of ordinance 2026-02 by title only include as amended with the removal of the word 'the'. I'll second. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Spencer.

Oh, yeah. I still love that job. Ordinance 2026-02, an ordinance amending chapter 131.11 of the Casside Municipal Code relating to fireworks and establishing civil enforcement provisions for the possession and discharge of illegal fireworks. Any further motions? I'll tell you on item number 131.11 C, you have two periods at the end of the paragraph. You need to take one off.

Thank you. Okay, there is no new business comments from staff. Uh we have a report from public works updating uh our uh ODOT and other things. Do we actually get a anything up there? No, should be

in the public works folder. updating what we've been doing with ODOT. Um, so I kind of put this together real quickly to give kind of a summary of the ongoing things because I actually talked to ODOT quite a bit and I attend a lot of their meetings online. So the this is a summary list. We obviously have the 101 Broadway intersection that we've talked about before and um there are slides that that back up each one of these. Um Peterson Point sinkhole and Culvert. Um I know you guys know there's that dip at Peterson Point. That's what I'm referring to and there'll be more details on that. That project is currently on hold. Um, but we have been supporting ODOT with that effort. Um, also I know some of you have asked about 101 crosswalks um, south of Broadway. I'll giving an update on that. Also, the flooding around the Circle Creek campground area where you have Beerman Creek also. And then something you may not have known about was uh the channelization issue at the outlet mall on the west entrance exit. So next slide please. So, um, a quick update, and I'm not really going to go into any details on this, but, um, the discussions I've had with, uh, ODOT and their meetings, um, that the one-way option that we've looked at before has been removed, um, due to the type of funding, they looked back at some of their rules and had to

remove that because their funding requires left turn lanes on all four sides of the intersection. So they are in process of developing a new third option uh for us to review. Um and we will be having meetings with them to look at these the three revised options for the intersection. Um all of the options provide substantial improvements not just to the intersection but extensions down Broadway in both directions. So there's quite a bit of benefit for the city uh to work with ODOT on this process. that will greatly improve this intersection. So, um, we have a sinkhole you see in the upper left there, that's actually a view through the sinkhole. And what you're seeing on the top of that is our old water mane that uh goes through the culvert. Uh, it was actually installed that way. So the question was uh that ODOT came to us. They wanted to do um some potholeing um to determine if that was our existing main or it was our old main and where was our old main. So our water department um went out there with our vector truck with uh the ODOT representative and we dug down on the upper side of the road and found our water line. Fortunately, our main operational line is underneath this covert, so it shouldn't be impacted by this work. And then the line you see is actually the old one, so it can be removed. Um, and I wanted to kind of give a couple shots. You can just see how much it's cratered right there. The upper right picture is where the outfall comes out and it's eroded the embankment considerably. So ODOT has been looking at armoring the embankment there which

would require some encroachment into the Nikanakum River and we have been working with them also to help mitigate that um which they'd have to do is mitigate maybe give um make more river space when they take it. And fortunately, um, we had a project on the books to replace our secondary access road to the water headworks up in the watershed. And that already had designed mitigation and in it would widen the channel there. And um which means that ODOT um was planning to work with us basically uh provide funding for the bridge demolition and mitigation work which would have been about half of the cost of that project which would have been a a benefit to both parties. Uh unfortunately it is on hold because of costs. Um we are exploring different options which may allow this project to move forward and um hopefully we can do that because it it's a benefit for everybody here.

What's the danger? The danger right now. Uh yeah, if you said it's on hold and yet it's a sinkhole.

Um yeah, they are monitoring it. ODOT is monitoring it and I know that they want to do this. I don't know the internal um issues within ODOT as far as funding of these things. Um the design team asked us even after they were put on hold to help them find that waterline so they could finish their survey work and we were happy to accommodate them. Um again another partnering um arrangement with HDOT to be a good neighbor and they are good neighbors to us and you'll see that later.

I I appreciate you doing that. My main concern is I've actually when you come around that corner coming south, I've seen people swerve over into the other lane to get around, you know, that sinkhole because I I can't tell you whether it's dropping more or not, but u people are definitely trying to avoid it. So, you know, you and I can continue to pass that on to ODOT that absolutely got to figure out some way to get it u fixed. So, we were able to do that work and answer a critical question for them so that they could get part of this thing done so that

when it is refunded um they would be able to launch a lot sooner so that they didn't have to wait for this. So um that's it is it is a hazard. They are aware of it. They are trying to push this thing forward.

Next slide please. So the crosswalks at 101 um they're just south of us and then another one at well the old KFC now the just the Taco Bell. Um you know that the the lights on the uh the north one which is closest to us are out of order uh because um something happened to the electronics and they were the lights were flashing continuously. That's a problem in our environment because we have such corrosive atmosphere to electronics. Anything outside unless it is militaryra is eventually going to fail. and that happened and we felt it was better to take it offline and not teach people that the flashing lights don't mean anything um because the ones further south still function but we have had requests to upgrade these to an audible. So we talked to ODOT and they are working with us to get us some grant money uh to fix these which is about $5,000 and that process is still ongoing. As soon as we get that, uh, it'll be implemented.

Specifically, there is a, um, blind person that lives in the neighborhood needs to cross at that location. Um, and so um, they I heard the complaint and we said, "Okay, let's let's look into this." I think as a standard moving forward. I mean I wish ODOT would have put those in to start with uh rather than I mean it comes at a good time when it's broken anyways but I think as a standard we would probably like to have audible when we were initiating any projects. They didn't know what our weather was like either.

I'm not too sure that's that's changing. I I I can't comment on that. I mean, the one that's three blocks south, the weather's not that much different between the two. In Atoria, it's not that much different. And they've been working fine there. So, I'm just Yeah, I can't comment on that. It could just be a mechanical defect or insulation defect that allowed atmosphere into there were three different options for the for the the scenarios here and whatever reason the um cheapest option was put in and uh I think having the audible for those with uh vision impairment would be

a good standard moving forward. Is there any sense of a when it I have asked that question uh recently and haven't gotten a response yet. Um but they are working on it. I know that. So, and we've our initial discussions with them were approximately a month and a half ago. So, it is a state agency. They do have a lengthy process sometimes especially with grants. Um but I have faith that um this will come through. Again, the southern one is still operational with the lights. Um, the lights still function at the northern one. It's just the controls aren't working properly.

They finally did, somebody finally did put up a out of order sign. Yes, it wasn't that was a long time. We we ordered some signs and put those up so people were really aware.

So, um, as you all are aware when we have our high precipitation and flooding events, um, that the area down by Circle Creek Campground floods. and you've got a couple pictures showing flooding events. ODOT is aware of it. They are having meetings uh to investigate uh potential options for remedy here. Um wherever that's either hydroological or um uh structural from the road point of view or a combination thereof, those are being discussed. So this is something that is on their radar in initial stages. I brought it up about 3 years ago now that when it really appeared it wasn't helping as much as we'd hoped. A lot of the things are going back to are the things that were done looked at in 2013 when they did the project the last time. So, you know, it was before your time. Um, again though, like just keep in mind everybody with ODOT, their funding is really up in the air right now. So, um, you know, even something that I think the the covert project was a couple hundred grand, you know, that should have just been a drop in the bucket, but now every dollar is fought for,

right? So, getting a steady continuing on Circle Creek is good.

So, uh, here's, uh, reflectors on the channelization on Highway 101 at the Outlet Mall. So apparently it's been an issue at night people coming out and they'll they'll drive over the channelization if they want to go southbound um because sometimes it's pretty dark and there's nothing that really pops that. So I called the local ODOT office and asked them what we could do for that and Mark uh Buffington was extremely helpful. got his crew out there and they have installed reflectors along that edge so that it's much more visible now at night. And I don't know if any of you have noticed that um but they got out there at

night down there at night. So um but no, they were very responsive, very quick, and I I give Mark and his team kudos for their support. That personal piece is very important.

I always like to use uh my presentations as a a chance to brag about my staff and the great things that they do. So, as you know, we've got a new fleet of trucks. We got six new trucks. And um we were looking at, you know, the extras. We put them on the strobe lights and such. And um your fleet mechanic, Steve Kever, and I sat down and talked about the lights. And we talked about what would be better for our environment. And the old light is on the right and the lights we chose are on the left. So the new lights are more compact. They're going to mount easier. They have about the same or greater intensity. They are submergence proof, which is IP688 compliant. So I think they can withstand up to 10 minutes of being underwater 5t or something like that. So, not that I want our trucks to be submerged, but at least the lights will still be going on. Um, the old lights uh are larger, more difficult to mount. They're not IP68 compliant. Not even close. Um, but the big issue is uh the 12 lights cost us about $68.

The the cost for 12 of the old styled lights would have been about $1,100. So, we saved about 94% off of the cost of that thanks to Steve and I uh taking a hard look at that. And uh he's been doing a fantastic job getting the trucks uh ready for fleet and work. Uh you'll be seeing if you probably already have seen some of them out there. We've got them undercoated and bedlined and stickered and we've got a new um numbering scheme for them to track them. Uh the fire department has been extremely helpful getting Steve up to speed on the tracking system that they use for their equipment that we are now using for public works equipment and fleet. So

just tell them to go don't try to test the five foot on. No, but again uh I like to brag about my employees. That's great. That's great. Any questions? Yeah. Have you heard any updates from ODOT on the Pacifica Apartments 101 access? I have not. That is one thing I have not heard about. So, be great to know.

Yeah, I agree. There's a couple others uh things associated like that with the drainage ditches on the other side of the road which are partially blocked that need to be remedied before that project is complete. And I'd like that attention drawn too because it could back up substantially like we had at the uh at the ball fields before. So that's been problematic. So my crew has cleaned out some of those uh culverts that go underneath the road, but it it'll still back up if we don't remedy that issue. So

thank you very much. Thank you. Nice lights.

All right. Thanks everybody. I just wanted to say thanks again for the proclamation and recognizing those tonight. Uh as for Sheamus in regards to what you I no idea who said what and when and how and where. So I really don't feel like making a perfect uh response publicly right now. And then last thing uh we just started today uh final patrol position by uh Aaliyah Samad and she has been in parole and probation in her past and so a little bit of different kind of law enforcement bringing to our department but uh she's going to be going to the police academy pretty quick by the end of the month. So, it'll probably be after her return, which I believe is going to probably be in August, before we'll be able to bring her before you and get a good introduction. So, anyway, we just wanted to let you know that and

Okay. Wish her the best. Have have fun down there. Okay, John. Anything? Kim,

just an update that I will have your information for you for next week for your conference. Our conference is before the next meeting. No, next week. Next week. Oh, next week. Okay, that's scary. Mayor, yeah. Spencer, anything else? Uh not to delay our meeting any longer, but um uh I did have the opportunity to attend the Northwest Managers uh conference, which is a gathering of the managers from Oregon, Washington, and Alaska.

Um a few uh key takeaways I'll share just very briefly, and I'm sure more will come out later. um of ideas and things that I've picked up on that I I want to pursue is um moving towards a more formal strategic plan for the city. Um focusing on this was a common theme throughout the conference, focusing on our core services and our realistic capacity and uh making sure that that is communicated with our public and not overcommitting um city. um aligning our our city staff with uh the with priorities and strategic plans uh managing our employees uh workload and helping them to avoid burnout and my favorite topic using uh tools like AI to improve our efficiency.

Of course, of course. Um and then just so the council's aware, I was asked to participate on a panel discussion on the impacts of uh tourism and impacts on on communities and um how how cities are dealing with that. So I was on that panel with u the city manager of Levvenworth, Washington. Oh,

and the city manager of Sika, Alaska. And uh it was a good preparation uh for me to present a little bit about seaside and participate in that discussion. Um I was hoping to learn more about that impact and then was asked to speak on it. Um but it was good and actually um heard some good things especially from Levvenworth as a good example. Very different. In fact, I would say all three cities very different when it comes to tourism and the big difference with us is we've always been a tourism focused city where others are inventing themselves as as tourism destination but there are things to learn from each of them and so

that was really good and then of course uh I'll share a little bit of bragging rights the the highlight was uh the city manager of Telmuk and I were out walking the city one evening looked for a place to eat and um happened to walk into a a restaurant uh just a few minutes before their um their trivia contest started and I will report that the two of us claimed second place only being beat out by a team of six people. Um but we did get second place and a most points per capita. Yeah. Which is congratulations. Yeah. Yeah. Uh, that's all I have to report.

Thank you, Council Ann.

Well, I I want the last couple of weeks I've had tours of a lot of places with regards to the city. And I just want to thank everybody for their time and their insight touring me around their facilities. Uh, the fire department, police department, thank you. the library, public works facilities, uh the sewage treatment plant, which is really interesting. And uh water develop uh the water department and uh community development. Thanks, Jeff. Uh all of these I I recommend anybody in the city if you have an opportunity to find out more about these departments to check them out because all of this stuff goes on behind the curtains and we take a you know we take it uh these things for granted and there's so much work that the staff and personnel do to make our city safe uh to uh make our city work and I just think it's amazing and if you have an opportunity to do that I highly recommend that and you'll have a new respect for everything that goes on in the city. Um, Mil Pond grand opening uh happened on Friday. It was great. It's wonderful to have that uh park open again and there were a lot of people uh depart the uh police department, fire department, uh uh facilities department, uh all the wonderful volunteers who made this event possible and opened up this uh this park again. It's it's a wonderful thing for our city to have here. Um and then finally, um Christine, you'll like this. I've moved my uh coffee with the counselor to the second Saturday and now I can visit yours and uh it's also going to be a new place. Uh it's going to be at the beer and wine

house on 11-11 Roosevelt Drive Street 350. And uh the next one is going to be May 9th from 9:15 to 10:15. They have coffee there. I'll be bringing the coffee. Yeah. And uh they do have wonderful selection of uh beverages, but uh you know 9:15 in the morning, unless you got the day off, I don't know. And then you could be careful as you drive out of the outlet mall. Turn south. That's Rothman.

Um just a couple observations of what's going on in the south end of the city. Um, if you haven't been to the the uh Billyax Broers, that's open. Excellent. Very good. I've been in there twice now and very good. And I see Rubies is going to come back up or they did come back. They're open. Yeah. And then what is going on at the old Bigfoot? I think they're just the building was crumbling. I think they're restoring it, but no plans for something to go in there. The last I knew, uh, Seaside Brewing was leasing. It's just a warehouse. Oh, okay.

Darn. I was hoping they were going to bring back that seafood fetuccini.

Um, again, kudos to the police department uh right before I left on my trip. Uh, somebody got arrested for a felony right in front of my house. And uh, my my neighbors started texting me wanting to make sure that it didn't have anything to do with me. But thank you, And other than that, just saying goodbye and thank you for the time and experiences I've I've had here. It's been interesting and sometimes fun. And I will not be that far away. I'll be I'm still going to be a landlord. So, I will be coming through seaside often and hope to see you.

You'll be paying the property taxes.

Yes, I will. Um, for those who who may not know, um, on um, I think it was April or no, March 29th, there was an article in the Atorian about how people are needed on committees and commissions in our cities. And um, they interviewed um, Julia Weineberg, who is a commissioner on the um, community center commission. and um she's quoted in there and she ma she made some very um uh good statements and uh talked about the value. So if you need a copy of it uh I can send you one or you can look online. So I think Julia represented us uh very well and I appreciate that theoran um did an article on the needs not just of our city but um it turns out all the cities Um the community center commission met on April 1st. We did not have a quorum, but we did do a lot of discussion about um marketing um the Chisum Center more and more actively uh collaborating with hotels and the convention center to let people know the community center is available for meetings. And um there was some mention about maybe being able to get information about the community center on the city Facebook page. So I don't know who manages that, but we uh we'd like to make sure that some community center news gets on that one. The library board met on the 7th of April and um since I was already there as the uh chair of the Seaside Library Friends

and Foundation, I filled in for for Heidi. Um and uh they reported to us about the Saturday um uh the fish to fry and that's not a cooking thing but the the uh collaboration with the mechanicum watershed council where um uh eggs were hatched at the library and then taken out to Kluchi Creek and released by um by kids and uh everybody. So that was the fry part of it and it was a great success and I I foresee more collaborations. Uh Jennifer also provided a lot of very good statistics. We have a very highly wellused library and probably the fund for the um you that you missed and that uh the board members got was they um were voting on fabric to um all the furniture is going to be recovered at the library and some interesting fabrics. So So they were uh busy. The tree board met on the 8th of April and unfortunately I was not able to attend because I was in a a budget meeting. Um but as you heard earlier tonight, we're no longer holding the Arbor Day event on the 18th. It is to be celebrated as a dedication of the Arboritum at the museum on Friday, May 29th. Um, I uh there is a count there is a candidate forum that will be held on April 21st at 6:00 p.m. And uh the

person that um Sheamus informed us was making uh spurious remarks about what's happening in Seaside. That person is actually running for county commissioner and that district actually takes half of Seaside. It's the southern half from Broadway on south. So, I would hope that somebody would address that candidate during the um the um uh forum and ask them to uh support their remarks with some facts. Um I would like to Oh, now it did it disappear? Okay. Um, I'd like to give a little explanation of why I voted the way I voted tonight on um, uh, on the commission position. Um, I truly do appreciate people volunteering. I'm out recruiting people to our committees and commissions um, a lot and I don't want to discourage people. However, I believe it's important that people know what they are getting into. I do not believe in appointing people to make sure that there's a quorum or to fill a seat. How I know that somebody knows what they're getting into is evidenced by the applicant having taken the time and initiative to attend a meeting and or read the ordinance, city ordinance or showing us during the interview that they understand the responsibilities and the function of the committee that

they are volunteering for. And I believe this is especially important as we work to uh revise make our revisions to our committees, commissions and board so that they can um work with the city staff better and um and understand what the needs of the council are. And um that's why I voted the way I did tonight. Thank you, Council Baker.

Okay. Um I had uh both committees that I'm the leazison on to had meetings since our last one. So the airport committee we met a couple of weeks ago. Um great conversation about all the work that's going on at the airport to make it a safe and welcoming environment uh for pilots. Um that public works has done a lot of great work taking down brush that blocked the approach. Um they fabricated a wind sock pole which is new to me. There's new signage out there. Um so just a big thanks to public works for all the stuff they did out there at the airport and also to the committee. they they do a lot to help out um with with that um maintenance really that needs to go on out there. The other thing is big thanks to them. They're they completed their spreadsheet uh for Spencer regarding functions and roles and responsibilities. So if you haven't seen that yet, you will see that any day. And then last Thursday we had a convention center committee meeting. Um all is going well there. They are very busy. Stay booked. uh bringing in lots of revenue. Um big thanks to the team. They really get together and support each other um and kind of pitch in and help with whatever needs to be done and that was really evident from some of the reporting. So um big thanks to our team at the convention center. The committee also has completed their spreadsheet with functions and uh roles. So that too will be coming to your inbox soon if you haven't seen it. Um, I want to put an underscore on National Public Safety Telecomuters Week. Big thank you. I think I mentioned last time about my ride along in the dispatch center. I am doing it again very soon. Um, really grateful to them and appreciate all the

work that goes on there. And then I'm going to exclamation point the mill ponds. gotten so much good feedback about what happened there. And um big thanks to the volunteers and everybody who made that possible. And the the thought behind um waiting and letting uh that area recover I think was just really brilliant and provided such a great um opportunity for our residents um last week. Big thanks to Heidi. Um, I just wanted to say thank you for everything, everything you've given to this committee, all the time, all the commitment, and um, not to this committee, to this whole city, to this council. Um, and good luck up there up north. We'll see you um, second to last, we finally have a community kickoff meeting scheduled for the uh, Seaside Village project. For those of you who haven't heard me talk about this 12 times now, a village is a neighborto neighbor network that helps people stay connected and independent as they age. And I am um working with a group to try to create a village in Seaside. Um we are having it at the library on Friday, May 1st, uh from 12:30 to 1:30. There are um brochures, flyers, there's some around here. Kim helped me put some out and then I'll be um passing them out as I travel around over the next couple weeks. But anyone, please reach out if you are interested in learning more. Everyone is welcome. Come learn, listen, and explore whether being part of a village feels right for you. So, uh really excited about that. And lastly, I

wanted just to announce that I am going to be running for city council again um for this coming year. I feel like I've had uh a two-year almost a year and a half now, but I will have had a two-year stint here. My work here is not done. I feel like I'm energized and have a lot more to do. Chris cares. I am committed to this city. I care about it. Um, it's my history and it's my future and I'm really excited to run again. So, just wanted to announce that. Thank you.

Tough act to follow there. So, I also had the opportunity to attend the Mil Ponds reopening. Uh, if you haven't been out there, you definitely need to go. It's totally different. It's all opened up. A lot of the brush has been cleared back. Nice wide trails you can ride your bike through or walk through or picnic. There's a lot of different options, but the most important thing is that everyone use the space because if we're going to reclaim it, we need to be out there and we need to be active. Um, and just to see the transformation that's happened from, you know, when we had a lot of problem with homelessness in there to today, it's it's night and day. So, definitely get out there, check it out. Finally, I do have a coffee with the counselor coming up on May 5th at 9:15 a.m. at Seaside Coffee House. I apologize. I had to do my uh previous one a little bit early, but I was there. Um, but this one I will be on time. 9:15 a.m.

I apologize. I missed mine because I was still out of the country.

Um, I mentioned earlier that um ODOT's struggling of funding that was kind of the big issue at the board meetings for COPAC and Northwest Act last week. Um, one note, um, the bumps still being worked on. It will be an ongoing project. I don't know that it'll ever get fixed, uh, permanently. It's just not really possible um, unless you can come up with about 20 $25 million. The regional focus though for Northwest Act, we all decided it's a tri county. It's actually four counties. Uh, it's going to be Highway 6. However, um ODA doesn't have any money, but whatever money they get, they're going to try to focus there because as you were aware, it was shut down for uh just a few days and that's really the only way in and out of the Tilmo County. Uh it's really tough on them if they can't use that highway. um repeat and it reiterate everything you guys said about Mil Ponds that

uh is just a fantastic place now. Get out and use it. Ride your bike out there. Walk the paths. Uh Bill Montero said it was 0.51 52 or something very specific. A loop around the track. Yes, it it's a half mile. Yeah. So, it's a nice easy walk and uh public works did a great job with putting a path there. So, it uh is uh pretty accessible. Um we will be um as far as uh board liaison, Chris has volunteered to fill in on the transportation committee and I was requested to do the library board so temporarily. Um, counselors, remember, uh, you got to save the date earlier, uh, April 21st, which is next Tuesday. Uh, make sure you're at the, um, Chisum Center at 6. Yeah. There will be Finger Fruits and such. And I want uh each of you to for the committees you're liaison to to u say a few words and be up there when we recognize whoever comes. Um every board committee and commission that we could think of has been invited. So uh and we'll have a special token of our approval for each person and that includes you too. You are volunteers if you need to remember that. I I think you get told that enough. Although I'm sure everybody thinks like uh the fourth graders do that you get paid big money. Um we are going back to work at the LOC legislative committees for the 2027 session and then some additional work.

And so I'm meeting on the housing economic development um committee as well as finance and tax which will not be discussing TLT for the first time in 8 years. Um our governor has decided that there's maybe some issues with the uh ethics commission bill that was written regarding serial deliberations. Uh, I don't know if you got an email today from um LLC uh lobbyist. Um, I will probably be writing a letter to the governor supporting the changes the LLC made and uh seeing what that does for us. I've also been appointed the position of the president-elect of the Oregon Mayors Association. Uh, it's scheduled to become the president of the association in 2028. Not quite sure how that happened either, but we had some we had some changes. Yeah. Well, I'm on the board anyway. So, that part of it, it gives me a good excuse to have some more road trips, and that's the part I like about the best. Next, uh meeting, we're going to be discussing our council vacancies, but the highlight of the meeting for me is going to be we're going to have the if I were mayor contest winners here. Uh it's always a fun thing. We're taking the posters back to the kids uh Wednesday and we'll tell tell them who won. This is the first year that all three of our cities actually have winners. We had enough con uh contestants posters from for Gearhart, Seaside, and Canon Beach. And uh so that means three times as many prizes. And the kids will be excited about that. And they have some great ideas which I'll share. So, in honor of our designation as a tree city USA, this is a quote that

I sort of made up. Our it's not a quote of anybody famous. Our trees and seaside stand as quiet guardians between land and sea, protecting what we love and defining this place that we call home. We're adjourned.