City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay. All righty. It is 6:11. Let's call the budget committee meeting to order. First rise for the pledge of allegiance.

Iledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. Sorry. Thank you. Commissioner Dumbrell, present. Commissioner Deorg. Commissioner Haggedorn, present. Commissioner Yugarte, present. Commissioner Warrington, present. Commissioner Weber, present. Chair Chris Baron, present. Vice Chair Cindy Hurst here. Lisa Fry present. Larry Gonzalez here.

David Hatcher here. Tom Murdoch here. And Terra Van Dyke here. Thank you. All right. First order of business. Do we need to elect the new chair and vice chair? All right. Looking at you. So, first order of business for the evening is I am actually no longer our chair. So, we need to elect a chair and vice chair to run this meeting this evening. So, open it up to the floor for any nominations. Cindy, I nominate Chris Baron to be the chair. I would second it. Have a first and second. Is there any other nominations on the floor?

All right. So, first and seconded. All those in favor? I any opposing? None opposed. Chris Baron is elected vice or chair. Next order of business is we also need to elect a vice chair. So I'll open up the floor to hear any nominations on vice chair. I nominate Cindy Hurst. David Hatcher has nominated Cindy Hurst. I will second. And we have a first and second. Any other discussion? Other nominations? Hearing first second call it to a motion. All those in favor?

I I hear none opposed. The motion passes. All right. So for tonight, I should probably speak into the microphone so our friends online can hear and it can be picked up in the closed caption. Couple housekeeping orders. First off, please speak into the microphone. We have friends that are online. We need to pick up the closed captioning. And another piece, a reminder, just like I said last time, this is not a policy meeting. Budget mid committee is very boring. If I start to hear politics in this meeting, I am going to beg this gavvel and bring it back to order because that is not what we're here to do. This is not politics. This is very much procedural. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to our city manager to start downloading a bunch of information to us.

Your consent agenda. Ah, thank you. Here, I'll share mine. Thank you. All righty. So, we have the consent agenda. We need a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. I move that we adopt the consent agenda, please. I hear a second. Council second. All right. We have a first and second. Any discussion on the floor? Hearing none. I'll move it to a motion. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. Right. The consent agenda is adopted. Now over to Bill Reed. Oh yeah. Thank you. No, you're keeping me honest. Thank you. Yes.

A copy of the agenda. No, Sharon is carrying a file. I know. I know. I've been out of practice of city government for a while. All right. So, opening up to public comment. Lori, has any public comment been submitted ahead of time? It has not. All right. Is there anyone out in the very empty chairs out there that has public comment they would like to share or online? All right, hearing none. We are moving past public comment and now into the presentation. Bill Reed, take it away.

Thank you, chair. Um, and thank you everybody for being here. Um my apologies for the information getting late but um just kind of want to set some kind of basic word kind of what this meeting is. Um and I go into with the slides which but I do not like the jump of the screen debris or whatever. Um forget that.

There you go.

Um so the city of North Plains, so you all are gathered um here for what what's called a midbian um just kind of check-in meeting. We're a bian we're a bianial budget city. You all gathered last year in spring of 2025 to um to hear a proposed budget and um go through the process of reaching a budget that you you wanted to vote on and voted to approve. You did unanimously to send to city council for adoption. The your vote happened in May of last year. City council took up the rec the budget recommendation from you all in June and did adopt unanimously. Um, and so this this is actually technically an optional midbian budget committee meeting. Some cities, as mentioned in the slide presentation. Some cities don't even bother meeting midbenium with their budget committee, but um it's a good idea to meet as a progress, you know, kind of progress report and just kind of go over some key things uh particularly given the budget that you all um approved last year. So to be clear for public process, there's nothing being proposed tonight that you all were required to review and come to a decision about by consensus or vote. This is simply mostly a lot of me talking and presenting information. And then on some key points, the hope is there's some discussion um whereby the city council members also taking part kind of get some advice from you all on how to maybe address some things. And all of the things we're talking about for the most part come from the budget that was approved and adopted. This body approved the 202527 bianial budget with some um recommendations and so we're going to

mostly touch base about the recommendations um and kind of give you an update about those things and hope and hope for you all to discuss them um just to kind of give some advice. So that's what we're doing here tonight. So there's no noticing of any documents to be approved or any of that. It's just a conversation for the most part. Um just the current roster of city of the city budget committee. Thank you everybody for being here. Um in your packet and on the screen are the adopted budget priorities by city council. They adopted those last year in early May. Um and the budget that you all saw as the proposed budget and approved um were the budget was constructed with these priorities and I I won't reread them but they are therefore just for you to remember. Um but that's uh that's how we constructed the budget. One comment on the priorities. Um this came up last budget season. I just want to bring it up again. It is not priority one, priority two. They're not ranked. That is just the priorities that council put ahead. So there's no ranking to those priorities. That is just what council has decided the priorities for the budget is.

Thank you. I just wanted to comment on this. We didn't find that out until we were all done with the budget. Therefore, we all assumed that the police patrol was number one on the list. and we focused on that. We didn't really focus on anything else. So, I just want everybody to remember that as we go through the the review. Thank you. Back to you.

Okay. So, that's it. Okay. So, um I'm going to walk through um we're going to walk through six different topics here. The first one is going to be me just kind of prattling on about where we are on on the the budget regarding expenditures versus the budget that was adopted and I kind of give you an idea of how we're doing going into FY27 in the second half of the bienium. And then the rest of the topics are going to be kind of the conversational ones and I'm going to try to watch the clock so that everybody we get a chance to cover everything. But really the big topics tonight are um as we me as was in the approved and adopted budget. The city was and still is technically but we're in the final days of it um negotiating and approving a final intergovernmental agreement with Washington County Cooperative Library Services. It dramatically changes how the city's library is funded in terms of county money made possible by the five-year optional levy that was passed um in November by Washington County voters. And that set up a very different funding formula for all libraries in Washington County, but particularly for smaller libraries like North Plains and banks for that matter. So we'll talk about that and in particular on the budget, we're not we won't talk service levels. We won't talk service delivery policy, but what we will talk about are the differences in what the funding mechanism for WCCCLS is going to be versus what we have in the budget as a guess at the time. That's the first thing. Um oop I didn't take out parks maintenance and funding. We will not be talking about that tonight. The second topic is going to be public safety um service levels and funding. The pro and as as Cindy mentioned um that seemed to be the priority number one based on a misunderstanding or miscommunication about budget priorities. Um but public

safety as a cost per officer is the or that's the single most expensive FTE that the city pays for by far. Um more than me actually u believe it or not more than the city manager. Um so we have it is something that is worth redising but um we'll talk about current service level potential new service level but really the funding issue around it. Um then from there, uh Dustin will talk about a couple of different things. Just an update on all of our capital projects, which ones have started, which ones have not yet, and why, and and you know, what we're doing, um to get an understanding of why some of our capital funds are are under spending at this point. And then he'll discuss kind of a key decision that that council is going to have to make about um replacing the roof on this building. but we would like to kind of hear your take on kind of the options we have for approaching it and the cost and and paying for it. Um and then finally, we'll kind of get into kind of more discussing the long-term fiscal planning um issues that the this budget committee process discussed. um recognizing that in particular that the water fund spends a lot of its revenue annually helping the general fund pay for things that the general fund does. Um and that's been a practice that's had to grow over time. There's a variety of reasons and we'll get into that. Um, any questions about that?

It's not spotlighting. There we go. Mid by name report in the email I sent out earlier and what will go out the agenda packet um for the council agenda packet on Monday is the um May 2026 finance department report um in its current form um for you know you all to review and council will review it. I'll give a report on it on Monday night. But the main thing that the and you got that by email this afternoon along with this the PDF of this presentation, but what council's heard um each month with each finance report um for our operating funds and then occasionally like quarterly regarding our capital funds and the urban renewal agency fund is that um we're operating below budget um for pretty much for all of our funds. Um we we don't have anything going over budget at this point. We have certain accounts and different funds that have been more active than others for a variety of reasons, but no fund is on on target to exceed its budget. And it no fund is certainly on target to exceed its budget by the 5% that triggered a supplemental budget. So unless something really dramatically weird happens, we're kind we're on pace to be at or below budget for every fund at the city right now. And there's a few reasons for that. We'll get into it, but that's the case for the general fund, the streets fund, which does all kind of the rightway maintenance duties of the city on the next slide. Water fund um also true of that revenues have been in above basically. And the other story to tell that I don't have tables on is that our the the the bedrock revenue streams that we rely on for the general fund, property tax revenue, franchise fees, um and for the water fund, water, you know, utility water water utility sales.

Revenues are in um above projection. We we intentionally projected revenues to be conservative for the for budgeting purposes. And um with the very few exceptions, revenue streams so far for the fiscal year have been above projections. So we're above with revenues and we're below with costs, which is kind of where we want to be based. Um the only fund that has a problem in that regard by design or or really by reality is the Jesse Maze fund. Um you know, we we have staff that set up, take down, clean up, uh help people who want to rent the building. Um but the amount that we charge for the rentals uh just does not cover it. So we track the Jesse this Jesse rent Jesse May's hall rentals and pavilion rentals together. The cost of it of of doing it all as well as what revenue we get from rentals. And we do that we've done that for a couple of bianiums now simply because Jesse Mays uh was buried in the parks and recreation department for a very long time. and you look at parks and wreck and you think, well, we have no employees in that department. Um, we do some mowing and and a little bit of here and there. Why is it bleeding so much? And the reason is because this facility and I mean it's a public good. It's not intended to be a profit center. Um, but the reality is that you know its operation is the intention is not for it to make a lot of money but but kind of looking at it as its own operational enterprise fund was the idea. So we can keep general fund services transparently general fund services um certainly in parks and recck department. And then this bianium with the budget that you all approved last year there's a new fund called the building and grounds maintenance fund. That fund as well is doing um we have it's fully funded by transfers from other other funds primarily the general

fund um but uh public works funds as well uh streets and water greatly but that fund basically accounts new newly in this bianium accounts for the maintenance and upkeep and contracts that we have for the buildings that we own. Um so that now the general fund and the streets fund and the water fund even more reflect the service provision that we do whereas the facilities costs and dealing and in accounting for those things um are in the building grounds maintenance fund. And so that's kind of where we keep track of all the different buildings and and grounds and upkeep um so we can have better kind of control and transparency of what's going on there. Um so just a couple of things expend control expenditure control budgeting um which we talked about in the we've talked about a few times for the city budget but um for FY212 23 bianium we u one of the first big projects I had was to convert the city's budgeting system over to what's called expenditure control budgeting and what that means is and we talked a bit about it before but each department in the general fund gets to work gets to save the money they don't spend at the end of each budget period. And the money that they don't spend rather rather than it just disappearing back into the general fund and have or spending it so they get it again the following year at least that much departments get to save the money and save up for projects and the library has most successfully taken advantage of this um program. It creates for a very complicated budget and a very complicated um review of it including for audit just because of different transfers and things and then interest earned on savings um year-to-year banium bianium but it's working and in fact when we first implemented it in the first bianium you know we identified

that you know we s I think we saved an additional 15 17% just by doing that just by that one measure so um that's that's a that's been an important move. And then budgets are under operating budgets. We haven't fully filled certain positions whether they have were vacated or we've had new positions approved, you know, in the budget. Um some of those haven't been filled. And so there is a gap of time where we're not spending that money and so we're under budget. And then Dustin is going to go over we've had some interesting rightway negotiation issues with some projects that um have not let us start some big capital projects when we wanted. And so it looks like we're really under budget for our capital funds, but the reality is just we've just been working through all the checklist that we need to do before we can begin those projects. And then finally, just kind of a couple big project big um funds that we that are get a lot of activity and and interest. the URRA um revenues for that one are going to come in probably a little under budget um budget projections and that's more just kind of a function of the the district is mostly built out and so there's not a lot of growth room for growth in property tax revenue in the URRA moving forward um it's you know mostly built out compared to other parts of the city um the GOA project moves forward we're working on fin the EPA brownfield grant is about nailed down Um, it's a federal process. The RRA will will soon have a loan, a very favorable loan for taking down structures on the on the project on the property and the grocery store is still extremely interested in being there. North Plains being their next store. And so, um, it's lining up um to work out for us well. But until we really get moving with that project, um what you'll see in spending versus budget um really is uh council as the URA board has taken up um getting rid of

the sunset clause so that the URRA could continue doing um redevelopment work in the city past July of this year. and um they've initiated um both a major five-year new five-year strategic plan to kind of get the urra more active in things and and repri prioritize new projects as well as put work into a new property incentive program. So there's consulting work and staff time and and all of that. So that's what you see there. The transportation bond fund is the big I didn't change the numbers on that should 2527. The transportation bond fund is the the primary fund that we use to do capital projects, transportation capital projects in the city that really are targeted at projects we can't get away with paying for with SDC's in kind of older parts of town where sidewalks are missing or path or trail improvements um are happening where we can't pay for them um because they're not purely due to growth. we can't use system development charges or transportation development tax quite as much or at all to pay for those. Um Dustin will talk about a progress report on these projects, but again it's just kind of, you know, legal work before we get there to be able to do it. The perimeter project here is a key one and I'll let Dustin kind of cover that later. Sweet. Can we pause there real quick?

Yes, you may. All right. Just want to open it up. Is there any questions over what Bill has gone over so far that anyone wants to ask clarifying questions? Yes,

Mr. Hatcher. Um um the civic center project what's that? The civic center project is the what amounts to the new city hall. Um back in 20 2020 202021 city council went through the process with uh FFA and architecture firm and a community outreach process to identify the need for um the project was called the civic center because it's kind of has some city hall components. It had a police department component and then part of the component to it as well is just kind of amenities outdoors that would kind of make the city hall library area a bit more multi-use, you know, fountains or what have you so that people would come downtown more. um with the construction of the Kindle building that building um supplies a lot that building came was came along planned and constructed since the civic center project was conceived and had a concept. So, um we're about to go through the process of redefining what the civic center um project is. The police department wants to stay in a Kindle building because it's an emergency operations center and there's secure parking there. So, we don't need that in the civic center quite as much. But council, we still need council chambers like real public meeting space with with appropriate AV investment. Um, and there's still a variety of other space. the the annex that we have now is wonderful reuse of the old city hall by the library, but it still doesn't get at the space that's been identified for library need over a 20-year period as well. So, so the yeah, the new civic center project is going to satisfy those

space needs and and the million dollars we got from Congress through USDA um is the first down payment. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Thank you. Any other questions? Mr. Weber,

just one followup to that bill. It's listed under the URA. Now, what was reported to us by a meeting, I think it was Elaine Howard, that they no longer allow URA funds to be spent on city halls that they did something in 2019, I think it was, and said that's no longer an option for us. So, I mean, that doesn't mean we can't build one, but it sounded like we could use URL. Um, so we can we can ask her again about that because what I heard from her as far as the city of Maul project goes is because it's an identified project in your 2627 plan that you adopted, it's grandfathered in as acceptable. We couldn't add it as a new project. Okay.

But because it's in there, it can in part at least be funded with Urra. I think what we'll we'll we'll work with Nick Copenuk and Tiberius on refining that

because I think even though it's still grandfathered in as a as a um an eligible URRA project only in part because I think there are restrictions on what other URRA dollars can be can like I like if we want to put a fountain and other things that that make the downtown district more attractive and usable. Those are certainly things the URRA can spend money on, but we we need him to refine some of the the the specifics on that because some aspect of it is grandfathered in because the UR the city council a long time ago put that in as a project.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions before we continue? Commissioner Hurst, um you mentioned that um the council had taken out the sunset clause in the URA on the URA and that there's going to be a 5-year strategic plan. So the sunset clause, was there a new date that had to be put in there or is it just the URRA is continuous? I'm I'm wanting to understand that.

Sure, no problem. No, it's a great question. So, um, the the sunset clause that was in the urban renewal plan was an optional condition added in the urban renewal plans 20 plus years ago. Um, that if if a city wanted to at the time have a defined term for the URRA, it was typically a 20-year period. And at the time, that's what was put in. that 20-year term would have been July 17th of this year. It would have ended and the URA couldn't do anything else. So, the that condition has been just been struck redlinined out of the plan, but nothing has been put in to replace it. So, there's no there's no two there's no there's no new 20-year there's no new 40-year sunset date. Um, they're pretty uncommon in urban renewal plans anymore. So if that's something new or different that the urban the city council as the urban renew renewal board should discuss then that's you know that's a policy topic but um but it's it's an option.

Okay. Okay. I just didn't know if there was a future date that had to be dealt with. Okay. No no no required date. It's it's even more optional now versus when it was then. Sweet. Just to make sure I'm not ignoring our commissioners online. Any questions from you? Please continue.

Okay, so the next slide really just kind of nails down uh or repeats kind of the four things that this this body um voted to approve the um the 2527 budget, but with some recommendations to city council. And so I just wanted to repeat this slide and share that we'll be getting into it pretty soon, but um the two long-term things really are the water fund has has increasingly been supporting the general fund. Um we have a very low property tax rate and so the water fund over time has been increasingly transferring money over to help pay for what the the levy the permanent levy that we have is not able to do anymore. Um, plus you throw in measure 50 and restrictions around that and over time that just gets to be a more and more difficult um, formula. And part and parcel with that is there was a recommendation to come up with a strategic vision for really just a new fiscal strategy for the city for the city identifying new revenue streams. So they go together. They're they're they're listed as one and three here and they were mentioned by you all and and and and stated as a recommendation to council with adoption of the budget, but we're but they're kind they go together and so we'll talk about those together later. The other one was there's a budget for an one more FT FTE deputy to bring the total FTEEs to four Washington County Sheriff's officers, a chief who is a sergeant and then three deputies. Our patrol officers are our deputies. Right now we have two full FTEES but the budget approved and adopted at the addition of a third um deputy uh in FY27 and that's that starts July 1. Um so that's the conversation. Um and then um reconvene um in the spring of 2026 to talk about this as well as an update about WCCLS.

And so with that, Robin, oh, and let me start with the big topic or question we hope you, you know, think about and and and we and we'll have a bit of discussion is what should or might be done with the the unexpectedly more library funding that will come from the county with this new IGA? Sorry, one question in your slide before that a couple slides back was the number three the strategic vision the fiscal strategy. Yes. Is that going to talk about that? Awesome.

Yes. Um so one and three how to deal with I mean h solving the water fund issue is broadly Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We we call in number one we call out the water fund because it very specifically is a an issue. Yeah. But if you solve three, you solve one. Okay, Rob, go right ahead.

Thank you, Bill. Uh, good evening, everyone. So, like Bill said, when we were planning for this current budget, um, we were already we had already begun the multi-year WCCLS, and that's the Washington County Cooperative Library Services funding and governance governance project. uh and we didn't know what the outcome of that would be and so we um so we knew what year one of the bianium what our allocation from WCCCLS would be and we received that um and it's unchanged from what was budgeted and then year two that starts July 1 uh we had budgeted 440,000 as a placeholder in the budget and um pending signing the intergovernmental agreement that uh continues our membership in the Washington County Cooperative Library Services. Um the current intergovernmental agreement or IGA expires this June 30th. Um once we sign that soon, the final draft is is coming soon. Then that agreement has us receiving $512,000 next fiscal year um with a formula to ask with a formula based on property tax um for the following four years of the agreement. So the impact of that is that the library department will have $72,000 net of additional revenue expected um in this coming year and we

have an adopted budget of spending and expenses that will remain the same. So it will be up to you all to um decide where those funds should be used.

Right. Um and just as a reminder the right now before the IGA the library um is greatly funded not completely but greatly funded by the city's general fund. And in the city's general fund, um, all the different departments in the general fund from public safety, community development, library, they all split like a, you know, there's a pie chart. They all get pieces of pieces of the pie, the whole pie of all of the unrestricted revenues that come into the general fund, the property, all the big revenue items that come in, starting with property tax and franchise fees. And so what that means is that starting next year, starting after July 1, the library won't need as big of a pie slice because we're getting county money.

County tax dollars.

County tax dollars. County tax. Yeah. Either way, um, but what that means is that because the library's pie slice for the general fund will be going down with the county giving us money, that means $72,000 can go to a different pie slice, a different department, or it can be it can be can go to reserves or whatever. Um, so we're, you know, we're not we're kind of looking for you all here tonight to kind of discuss what you think, you know, might be the priority. save it. Um, dedicate it to parks and wreck for more programming or just kind of what your thoughts are or we have a big list on on the safety reason. And when we talk about it, this money is mentioned as one piece of what could be a recipe of different things if you know there was any sort of priority or recommendation about that. But that's the idea is the library's pie slice of general funds is smaller now with the agreement and that the rest of the pie slice it would have been getting can go somewhere else.

If you're how long is the county plan how long does the county plan last? The intergovernmental agreement runs along the same time period as the WCCLS tax levy. So it's five years and um I will add that this allocation is meant to cover the operational costs for our base service level. Uh so operational costs meaning the non um non-administrative non facil non building capital costs. So, so it's conceivable that in five years time after five years that money will be gone. Let's say do another levy,

right? It's really difficult to say now what the the next fiveyear would be, but the way it has been is that we renew an intergovernmental agreement every 5 years and it runs along the same time period as the library tax levy because the agreement governs how those taxes are spent. I just I'm just thinking five years down the line. Um are we going to in order to have the library function as it is now? Yes. Hold on. And so

and so I'm just think it's five years down the line if the if the bond money goes away and we want to have the same level of service from the library, then we're gonna have to as a city start coming up with the money again. And so they can well saving would be, you know, for a rainy day would be a good thing to do with some of the money as a uh a way to kind of manage what's going on. So my two cents. Thank you, Mark. I saw you're turn your mic on. Did you have a comment question? Yes, sir. Um we recently approved a modification to Dustin's budget for water resources.

Get a little closer. Sorry, I can't hear. It's on. There we go. There you go. Thank you.

We recently approved an addition to the budget to support Dustin in the water department. Shall we think of that money that we approved as a reduction from this money that we're discussing now? Or is this budget that we're examining right now in addition to what we are? Um, uh, Council Forge, it's, um, I mean, kind of completely different pots of money. Um, the the position, the the job description that you all heard and by consensus, um, thought was a good idea would overwhelmingly be funded by the water fund and so paid for by monthly water bills. Um, and this money and what, you know, what you all kind of identify as priority would really be more about the, you know, general funds services. So, library or police or community development or you know those sorts of things.

Commissioner Weber, did you have a question or comment? I have a dead mic. Sorry. I I would just one comment. I like the idea that was mentioned. It's exciting that we're now have a new job that will be a part-time communications and a part-time uh parks person. this would be a really nice thing if we could throw some all or some of that towards programming for this new employee we have. So I think Billard mentioned that as an option. I think that would be worth considering. Thanks Mr.

Sorry I have a couple questions here. Um so you mentioned that after this next fiscal year that there is a pro a a um a formula based on property taxes to figure out the allocation to North Plains. Do you think that that formula will reduce the allocation below the 512K that we're receiving this year? Um, that's an interesting question, Commissioner Hurst. Thank you. Um, there is no guarantee in the agreement of any certain amount because it's it depends on the property tax receipts. Um, so but the formula all library levy funds are designated to be spent on library only. Um what you may not know is that there is also a transfer from the county's general fund tax dollars that support um libraries also. And this was from was it 1997 when the um we had a library levy and that was folded into a permanent tax rate with measure 50 or five 50. Um and so uh at that time um every year the county or the budget committee for the county has been making a transfer from the general fund to library as a legacy transfer um because of that former library funding that was folded into the permanent tax rate. But there is nothing in writing or anything um guaranteeing

that will happen every year. Uh so um we like all government agencies um it will depend on tax receipts and they'll apply a formula of escalation. Um, and there's details in the agreement, but for this year we're talking about tonight, we do have an amount. It's the 512,000. And when we start preparing the next banium budget, we'll discuss that more. Could I follow up to that?

So, all the different all the city managers with libraries are part of what called the LBCCLS executive committee. And what I would put at the end of Robin's answer is yet. Um that so there there's lang when the levy was passed that supports this. Um you can still go online to read this. The voters were told library funding would go up with this new levy and higher levy rate that was approved. And so there is work being done to put some tighter language around some asurances about future le funding levels because it is two things. Local option levy revenue for the library countywide library system and then a county general fund addition. And so there is work being done by the member of libraries, city managers and and executive directors if they're nonprofits, nonprofit libraries incorporated areas. There's work being done to put some language around that. Now, um when that's done, we can let you know. But luckily, Commissioner Jerry Willie will be here on Monday night, and I think a question about this might be a good idea.

Okay. I just want to make sure that I'm understanding that the 512K is just this next fiscal year and we have no clue how much is going to be coming in the following fiscal year. We have no guarantee. We have no guarantee about FY28 2930. What we do know is that the county's taxable assessed value has increased by an average of over 4% over the last number of years. All right. And so from the levy alone that should be going up at least 4%. What we're looking for strengthened language about is the gen the county's general fund addition for that.

Okay. Has there been discussion from the county to withdraw those funds or or not make that transfer? Is that in in the discussion package? No, but they have committed to fund this base level of service at every library. Okay. So there's not a specific amount, you know, tied to that except for this first year. Uh but they have they have committed in the agreement to fund the full um operational base level service operational costs for every library. So yeah, so they can't do that without the general fund transfer is what I'm saying.

Yeah. Okay. Right. So what that basically means is that the county the county budget the county in the in the agreement the county has stated that the county general fund will contribute revenue to the total WCCLS revenue amount and aotment but they don't commit to a specific percentage increase year-over-year. Well, then I then I understand. I just want wondering if they're saying 512K this year and the formula comes out to 300K the following year, is that is that possible?

Yeah, it that that would be the greatest bait and switch at the county level I've ever seen. Okay. I mean, that would be very that that would have that would take a catastrophe. I I would guess from what the assistant county administrator has said. Yeah.

So the every year there's going to be a recalcul the new taxable assessed value every year is going to be calculated. The local option the countywide local option levy is going to be applied to it with an estimate of how much revenue will be for the following fiscal year FY28. And then the county would go through its budget process on how much it would add um with the pledge that you know it wouldn't be cutting funds so that revenues go down. I mean all of this was sold to the public on revenues were going up and it's a fiveyear thing. Yeah.

Now now they might say this year it's going to be a million dollars and next year it's a million dollars 25 because there's a problem. But we're not talking shaking a hatchet to the numbers. That that's what I what I'm looking for is, you know, if it goes down a few thousand, that's one thing. If it goes down quite a bit, the the reduction in funding would be an inflation, right, thing rather than a I have another question unless you do.

One second. Uh, Commissioner Hatcher. Um just a word of caution and follow up with uh what Cindy is talking about. When I was mayor, we had a huge um uh decrease in property value. Yeah.

Which cut the um tax. The mayors are really concerned about it. Cities were concerned about it. I think in the end it didn't turn out be as bad as we were concerned about. Um but it resets measure 50. It resets everything at a lower value. Um in today's economic world, who knows where that's going to end up at? That's all I want to say because um with these questions, it's kind of really hard to really say what the futures Yeah.

what our funds are going to be rolling. Thank you. I think Hi there. So, am I on? Um so, I just want to clarify with you, Bill. So what we're what you're looking for us to decide is of the 50,000 or how much00 do we trans 72,000 is what we transfer out. Um so it looks like we transfer out $1.82 million out of the water fund to cover is what portion of that is for the general fund? So it seems to me that if we are using water fund to cover the general fund then that's where we should just leave

park in the general fund in the general fund to allow for less money to transfer out of the water fund. That's my personal thing. Commissioner had another comment.

Yeah. So, um, on the previous slide that you had on there, there were the, um, you know, the acknowledgements about the long-term dependence on the water fund. One of the other things that was, um, approved by this budget committee was that the city conduct a fiscal strategy study. Has that been done or even started or considered at this point? We don't we we don't have a fiscal strategy um right now. We we we have talked about the council has more talked about um um has more talked about kind of identifying new funding sources um should uh if you know for kind of law enforcement but there hasn't been a broad fiscal strategy discussed yet. Are there any plans to take a look at the at the fiscal strategy of the city going forward?

Um I mean there's no active plan or agenda item for it, but now would be the time.

Okay. Um secondly, one of the other um issues that we talked about was for the city council to use the next year, and we're talking about this past year, to figure out a revenue stream for the police department. Has that been done? um through October of last year, we discussed um different options and um you know we kind of we didn't they didn't land on any decision about it but we discussed kind of different options that exist and then if a local option levy were to be explored what kind of calendar um you know council would need to be mindful of and I have those slides actually in this

deck. I I know about those because I think it was September that I came before the council asking again about looking for the revenue stream and if they wanted a revenue stream they had to get off the mark because February was the deadline for putting anything on the ballot. So nothing has been done in that vein since October. In that vein um no not since October. Okay. Thank you. Great questions. And I'm also going to just kind of beer us back to the task at hand. We are talking about 72,000. These are great questions and probably comments for public comment. City council meeting

Jeff. Yep. Correct. Just quick don't want to read too far a heading to the slides, but but I think we do need to park it because of if I'm not mistaken somewhere later on you're going to be asking us to make a recommendation on 50 or $80,000 we just made that I don't know that that's in the budget for the roof repair. No, that um uh no, that will be something that would be a recommendation to probably use contingency funds to to pay for which that would come out of the Jesse Mace

line item. Correct. No, actually it would be a um it can be a general fund contingency um expenditure through the parks and recreation department and ultimately a transfer, but that's where the that's where that's that's the easiest place to make a a use a contingency for for the move. Okay. Robin, would you please continue? Uh this slide shows the Washington County and the member library service areas. And so these were redrawn as part of the funding and governance. And the green arrow pointing to the green area is the North Plains Library Service Area. It was adjusted slightly um to match our elementary school boundaries. before it didn't it didn't extend below 26. You can see the red dot. That's our uh incorporated portion of North Plains. The Equality Ridge Elementary School boundary goes down below 26 and um and the they looked at library users um and where they lived and those that area had the heaviest use at our North Plains Library and so it made sense to assign that to us. And then Banks and I discussed keeping all of their school district in their service area since they have the relationships with those schools and that was a sensible approach. And so basically our service population remained the same although it shifted a little bit south and a little bit west. um the people living in the east of our former service area were using the Hillsboro library and so we had um them

you know assigned that area. So, but that's just kind of what we're responsible for in the agreement with those funds, tax dollars. And then this slide shows you what every member libraries um tax dollar allocation is from the WC sales levy and the general fund transfer combination. Um and this is uh has a now thankfully after this multi-year process a clear transparent formula based on population and um service area service areas based on voter precincts that will be updated annually so that we um will have updated population numbers. Uh so it was a really it was a really important um worthwhile project to do. Uh Andy Verer started it with with me, then Rob Drake, our interim city manager, and then we wrapped it up with Bill. So I'm glad I could be the common thread for that to advocate for North Plains. When we talk about the next the budget preparation for the next bianium, um we will have gone through a centralization project to um create some efficiencies within the library cooperative. Uh and that will result in some um savings when we talk about our next budget. It will reduce our library materials budget line item and it will create staff capacity. um for some things that we won't be doing at the at the North Plains location that will be done um the county location. So the we'll have to analyze the actual

savings once we go through that centralization project. It's hard to We know some of it, but until we actually do it and we actually um see what the staffing requirements are for the space service level put into practice, we don't have a number yet, but we will by the time we're doing budget prep.

Okay. Um thank you, Robin. Um that's a dramatic change. Just so everybody knows um the last just the last word I'll mention about that is when the study process for this IG kicked off it was confirmed and identified that North Plains was paying the highest percentage for its own library from its own general fund among all of the city libraries. It was getting the least assistance from the county among city libraries and the city was paying for its own library the highest rate. And so this is a um very welcome reversal of that um very bizarre funding formula that we were living with before. Um, okay. So, next big questions. There's a little bit of policy involved here, but it's it's wrapped up in in funding. And that is if the city, you know, should the city figure out a way to pay for um a third FTE deputy to bring it up to uh four total FTEEs? Again, right now we have two patrol officer FTEES, uh, two deputies, and we have one chief who also does various similar duties day-to-day as well as chief duties. And that's a total of three FTEEs. It's the same service level we've had since the ser basically the same service level we've had in terms of number of FTEEs since the city transitioned to Washington County Sheriff's Office contract for law enforcement. And I believe that was 2017 2018 when that happened. We've had basically the same number of officers in town on the city's geography and response times have changed um with Spring Hill and with Sunset Ridge Build account. So it's you know it it it's a it's a question they have but the issue is given the cost how to pay for it. So um just a couple slides with a

reminder about um numbers. So, um, a a single FTE deputy 1.0 allin cost the city $280 to $300,000 annually. That includes with Washington County Sheriff's Office. That includes absolutely everything. That includes bullets. That includes vests, cars, camp, you know, training. I mean, everything involved in the cost of an officer is is embedded in that figure. But it is $280 to $300,000 annually depending on overtime. So by far the most expensive FTE the city pays for. Um actually the sergeant, the chief is uh more than that by uh 15 to 30,000 depending on overtime. Um the total adopted budget that you all approved and the council adopted for for public safety, which does include a bit of emergency management but not a ton, um is $1.9 million. That's what you adopt. That's what you approved and council adopted last year for the bianium. Um, if we keep three FTEEs and don't bother adding an FTE, um, our, uh, expenditure for public safety with Washington County Sheriff's Office by the new contract numbers, if we keep things exactly the same, our expenditures on public safety will be $1.8 million compared to a budget of 1.9. If the new FT FTE is added, we're looking at over $2.1 million um total. So, we would be looking at um definitely an increase in how much public safety is spended. Now having said that the context is that um while we track individual departments and we're careful about every line item account with every department at the end of the day when it when it comes to city council adoption of a supplemental

budget we're really looking at at it from a fund by fund basis and public safety is one of the more expensive departments in the general fund but it's far from the only one. So it's not completely clear depending on other things that adding this police officer would for sure at least this bianium push the budget um into supplemental budget territory but there's still no revenue stream identified and adopted or approved by the voters to pay for that. So keep in mind $280 to $300,000 for one year and it tends to go up by six 7 8% annually sometimes 10. We've had years where it's been year-over-year 10% increases. Um, so how to pay for it. So here are just some different revenue streams that we've talked about before just as examples of different parts of the mix. 72,000 starting with $72,000 in FY27, the second full year of this bianium. We know that um we will have $72,000 more than projected specifically from the county for the library. I'm not saying I'm not suggesting it that's what's used. I'm just saying that's that is maybe part of an ingredient or not. The two big options that city council has that the city has is either a monthly water bill, which is a fee, a flat fee on the water bill, or going to voters with a local option property tax levy. Those are the two most powerful things that any city really can do to to generate immediately generate new revenue. Okay? And so just based on the math of an existing fee we have on the water bill, we have a transportation utility fee that people pay every month on their water bill. Pays for streets and

sidewalk maintenance and street light maintenance. Based on those numbers, if a $5 water if a $5 fee is put on everybody's water bill for police for public safety, that in FY27 would generate at least $190 million $190,000, sorry. it would generate $109,000. That's a lot of money. Optionally, just as an example, based on our our current property tax revenue and taxable assessed value for this year, our current permanent levy that everybody pays and the only levy rate for the city on your bill, the city portion is $2.17 per thousand taxable assessed value. If 50 more cents were added by the voters as a local option levy, that would generate at least $250,000 um in revenue that if posed to voters for public safety could be spent on public safety funding. That's just a 50 cent le based on um the taxable assessed value in the city. Now, but keep in mind we're about build out. So that revenue stream will not increase by much more than 3% annually due to measure 50 here forward uh because we're about built out. There's not a lot more new growth that can kind of add to that. So those are kind of the options. And so really kind of the question for discussion is a new police officer is a service level policy question but it is handinhand with a new revenue stream that would have to happen. So what do you think about a new revenue stream or at least among the the lowest hanging fruit for doing the most good more immediately is the question to you all.

I'll start. Um, I think when we met as a budget committee last time, there was a charge put before council to get that squared away. And so there's been plenty of time to get that squared away, to get that figured out. I think bringing it back to the budget committee to then give the same charge to council is probably it's going to yield the same results, unfortunately, unless something changes. But the reality is it's already we've already had a motion. We've already had a charge last time we met and the charge was go find the revenue source and here we are again having the same discussion about where the revenue source is going to come from. So why waste this group of commissioners times talking about a policy thing when I need the policy makers in the room to go make the policy happen? I'll open up to any other questions or comments. back to my uh back to my original, you know, the money might run out in five years from the library. And so I'm looking at it going, okay, so great options, but it seems to me, I mean, uh, people are going to be looking at their water bill and going, you know, it's going up $5, but it's not really even buying a an FTE police officer. And so they're going to be wondering like, well, what am I getting for my $5? Uh whereas if uh the levy let's say went to 75 cents that would cover our FTE and it's a you know one time you pay every year and it's a little bit easier to swallow because you're going okay I'm me as a taxpaying resident

getting a full-time police officer for my 75 cents warrant per thousand. Um, Commissioner Vand,

um, I would also like to reiterate what Chris said. Uh, we don't get to decide with the budget committee, right? Like where the revenue stream is going to come from. That needs to come from city council. So having us make suggestions is all we can do. We can't make a decision on that. That needs to go to city council. So I do have a couple other questions in regard to this though. Um are there do we know what other cities uh around us what their uh how many um what their staffing level is for other cities. So is is for an appropriate funding and that's one of the questions that I have.

Sure. Um so staff knows um we have there's there's kind of an annual survey internally among cities um of police staffing and how it's paid for um and in other cities frankly it's there are local option levies that target that specifically fund police um but very often it's fees but I have a gigantic table with all this and it's updated right but we haven't talked about it you know kind of in a targeted manner Um, I guess I mean for staffing wise, like how many is an appropriate amount of police officers for our size of community?

Yeah. No. Um, there hasn't been a kind of definite study of that with conclusions. Um, chief isn't here this evening. um and he's kind of interim so his familiarity with some of this stuff isn't great but with the loss of Nick Jones as our chief who tracked this stuff um he could have answered that question a bit but no there's no kind of document that says we need to have this versus what we have now

and then my second question of that becomes do we need to provide or maybe we already have provisions for a place for police officers our staff to go in between to write reports and do that sort of thing. Do they already have a location for that? Yes, in the in the Kindle building, they have a dedicated area. And so then um is our need for additional police officers due to our increased size and increased development to the city of North Plains. And if that's the case, then are we getting that increased revenue from developments?

Um that is a complicated question. So I'll try to answer it in parts. Um thank you. So um if you know I think what what Chief Jones when he was chief would say is the equation for new public safety officers kind of boils down to a couple of things. Um as one would expect it's incidents and data regarding police calls and different types of police calls and time of day and that sort of thing. And um we have a peculiar situation in North Plains that has been confirmed back when we did the local option levy, tried a local option levy a few years ago and it continues to be a bit of a problem and that is that residents of North Plains far too often post public safety problems on social media and they don't actually call the non-emergency number. Now, they do if there's a, you know, there's a an immediate incident, but if a bicycle stolen or somebody suspicious is doing something, it's on their Ring camera on Facebook. I mean, I I simplifying, but that happens a lot. And so, our data regarding incidents is very incomplete. So, it's hard to look at the data we have to say, "Oh my gosh, we need two police officers." But if we had all the data that we would like to get about it in the system, it would be far easier to say we're under by this amount.

What about response times? We could use response times also that

and that's the other one. Exactly. So there's number of incidences and then there's response time and um that's kind of a function of the geography of coverage. And so if you're based at the Kindle building um you know the the distance for response in the city of North Plains has one side to the other doubled in size. And so from just that measure alone um that's a bit of an issue uh or can be at different times of day. I think um it's kind of a combination. And so, um, I think if you know, one part of this can be I can have the sheriff's office come out and kind of discuss this very frankly. We have a proposal for an FY27 contract that just renews this the existing level of service and um, they can they can come and kind of present what they think would be appropriate. um that would be easy to do and then that can inform what ultimately has to be a city council resolution to approve the contract for the

design a question or a comment or question and then we'll go to commissioner hatrick commissioner hatrick go ahead go oh thank you um I I this is kind of a question I I recall the chief uh giving us a lot of that information. Yeah, he he has it. Um it just kind of never turned into like a concrete you really need this now. Chief texted Nick just texted and he said he recommends at least cocktail napkin one FTE per thousand residents. We currently have 4,200 residents. So that's 4.2 FTE.

Yeah, four would be appropriate on on that measure. Thank you, Dustin. Do you have a comment?

Yeah, Dustin Muganati, public works director. For those of you who don't know me, that's kind of hard to believe, but anyway, um I've been pretty quiet about some things and I'm going to rattle some chains perhaps. Some of the stuff will probably be spoken on one of the later slides, but also keep in mind that there is a huge transfer out of the water fund uh going to the general fund. And so in a sense the water fund is subsidizing uh you know public safety. I also have to consider um keeping in mind um we have a lot of public infrastructure that we need to work with and I have a staff that I need to maintain and I have to compete with Washington County. There is a lot of highpaying jobs there that I cannot compete with. Um which is one of the reasons why I do not have a supervisor right now. and why I had to up everything to an operations uh manager to be able to compete. So, some of this stuff that's already been budgeted, I have a little bit more money now because I haven't spent it yet because I haven't been able to hire the right people, which by the way, I haven't heard anybody from I opened up the uh the listing maybe a couple weeks ago and I haven't heard anything yet. I'm I'm expecting this position not to be filled for another probably six months to 12 months or so. But keep in mind that um water fund subsidizes the general fund which subsidizes uh public safety and I have a lot of projects that are going to be coming up in the future and I have a new water master plan that needs to be done. Um and we have you know other things that just need to be uh taken into account um as far as you know water drinkability and um uh independence perhaps um and seismic resiliency. there's a lot of things that I need to it's even though it's not in this particular budget cycle but for future budget cycles and so just kind of keep that in mind but we'll go over that a little bit later.

Okay, I'm just trying to bring all this up to together, which is if we've already made the recommendation to the city council and nothing was spent, are are there any members of the city council that would like to kind of inform us, what are they looking for for from us differently this time? Yeah. in order for something to be conducted.

I think that's a great way to frame it because yeah, I don't want to talk too much about policy, but we have city council members here. I see two viable options and it's on our policy makers to decide which option they want to run with and which one they're going to tell their constituents they're moving forward with. But if you have other ideas or you want other recommendations, this is the time for it. The reality is a recommendation and a charge was given last time and it's going to be the same one this time. If I could jump in, Bill, can you clarify on this uh position? I assume that this is daytime coverage and not nighttime coverage with this extra position. So, I know officer safety is a is an issue at night.

Yeah. Um, great question. So, um, Commissioner Leforge, um, for this meeting. Um, so this an additional position at this point would help, um, begin to cover patrol overnight, a few nights a week. Um, there was a period of time where we were spending a lot of overtime doing that with existing officers or other Washington County officers willing to volunteer for the overnight overtime. And that was kind of at the time of and in the wake of a big uh catalytic converter theft ring. And when that went away, when that was when Washington County Sheriff's Office busted that case, our issues kind of quieted down and we we were able to back off uh on the cost overnight. But one position would kind of be let us assign overnight in town overnight coverage. To be clear, Washington County Sheriff's Office will respond to any call any time, including at night, but you are at the mercy of how close the nearest officer is in North Plains in the middle of the night. That's the issue. It's really kind of a dedicated person here who will respond within North Plains within a certain amount of time and it would begin to get us overnight coverage um a number of nights a week.

Commissioner Warrington, I saw you turn your mic. You have a comment question. Yeah, thank you. Um I am new to the council and as everyone knows. Yeah. Um so really there's only two viable options listed here, right? The 72,000 isn't going to do anything, right? So it's either the water bill increase or the levy. Um do either of those have to go through the voting process?

So the water bill fee does not. The levy absolutely does. So, those are the two options that the council would have to consider is putting it out to the voters through a local option levy, which I will tell you historically has not gone well. I've been part of a local option levy task force I think two times and it failed. And so, the reality is it really is going to take our policy makers spearheading that campaign that like communication to the voters why it's important if it's something that is deemed important by council in this budget committee. Uh but as far as the water bill, no that is something that the commit that counselors can actually adopt uh with a with an ordinance or what is it an ordinance but you know what I'm talking about the

yeah the fee can be the fee can just be adopted by council fee is actually by ordinance.

Yes by ordinance is by ordinance. Yeah. So that's actually a great question and and the advantage of a fee is that it's it is adopted by council by ordinance. So, it's put into the municipal code and it is up to council thereafter to determine what the level is or however you know it c it has it's it's perpetually a fee until council decides to eliminate it as opposed to a local option levy which has a defined five-year period. So, just questioning again, um, Commissioner Baron, can we get the paperwork, uh, sent before council again so we can review it in more detail than just talking about it here?

Absolutely. Yeah, as I look around, I take note that there is one, two, three new counselors from the last time we met a year ago. Um, so yeah, there is definitely a new group at the table. And so, yeah, I think it's time to reconvene and have those conversations again. Commissioner Hagador, uh, two comments here. Well, yeah, two, yeah, two comments here. One, it's at 7:30, so I want to do a time check. Yeah. Um, I think we've discussed this topic enough. It's a council issue and and primarily in the policy bullseye. So, we can and should work with the mayor to make sure that the city manager and the mayor get this back at it to current or uh old business, whatever. Agreed.

We would categorize that this has. But I do want to um emphasize that as the city grows, the number and nature of the issues that we see in the city also change. We've had a domestic violence issue recently that happened overnight. And I believe the um the time that the um victim had to wait was in the 15minute ballpark. And this was a physical aggravated violence in the new Brin Hill district. I think we also have some squatters. So that's another net new flavor. So the nature of our issues are no longer uh speeding tickets and burning five business. So we do need to take this issue this issue seriously and especially overnight. So that's all I have. Thanks.

Thank you. And yeah, I I agree with your comment. We've veered off into policy and so I would just say stay in charge as before. Let's let our policy makers make the decision. Mr. I was just going to say one one other thing and it does get into policy, but what I will say is um council soon they're going to find out on Monday. Um, we have come up with uh with the city attorney, we've come up with a new chapter of code that spells out very specifically how officer how the city can enforce non-land use code so that we can send things to court if need be in ways that we are not able to right now because our code is so old and difficult to use and that's going to make police officers busy in town for instance and that kind of changes the dynamic as well. So, um, there will be more activity for police officers to be doing because they can do something about some things.

Excellent. Thank you. All right, let's get back to the presentation. Looks like we're at public works, capital projects, and status updates. So, Dustin, I'm going to guess that's probably you. Hey, back to me. Unless Bill, you look like you had something. No. All right, cool.

All right. This uh first table straight from the budget. And keep in mind that um all the capital projects are not on this table. There are some other capital outlays that are within the budget, but these are just the major projects that are presented. And that's kind of the um the outline that I'm using for this particular slideshow. Uh next slide. The two major projects that are the closest to fruition are the uh Main Street Improvements Project and the Jesse Mays perimeter project. And both of them right now, although that they are 100% designed, we can't go forward with a bid just quite yet because we're waiting for utilities to um relocate and it's not always an easy game. I know some of you uh have been around when there's relocation issues with the North Avenue project, but that's with the developer. That takes a lot more time than working with the city. And this is taking time. Um, so we're having some rightaway issues and it kind of goes back to franchise agreements and everything where where can they relocate their poles and things like that and it's just kind of a back and forth uh tugof-war with the legal department and everything. And so I wish it was faster um but we kind of held up by um some of these rightway issues on both of these projects. Um but once all that is uh out of the way, these two projects will be ready to bid. We'll have community meetings um and just kind of uh describe what's going on and we'll be ready to go on these. Next slide unless there's any questions on those particular questions. Um also, yeah, I haven't spent any money on all all these capital projects because we're, you know, still waiting on utilities for the most part. That's going to be a common theme within construction. Okay, I have a question. Um, I do know

that you're lean on resources, Dustin. So, are there projects on here that you do not for, you know, there's a lot of delays on holds? Are there any timed lines? What's the feasibility realistic feasibility that will move some of these forward on July 26? Uh, that's what I'm going to get to. Uh, on 20 on the ones that are ready for bid or the ones that are not started on hold. not started and on hold. The ones in red.

Uh so the I'll get to that on this page right here. So commercial street safety project. Uh so this is a project that's it's actually um three projects in one by four funds. And so it's a $300,000 project that that has kind of already been budgeted for. And then this is basically going to be the slurry seal from Main Street all the way to Gleno. This is actually a project that should have been done about 3 four years ago before I got here. um and was listed on our pavement management program. Uh but it just has not gotten there. And this was supposed to happen before we have our downtown improvement plan, which um is probably maybe 8 to 10 years away. Once you do um uh once you neglect maintenance for a certain period of time, it gets more expensive when you do the reconstruction. And so this is kind of like the paint on the house kind of thing. And so we have um the ADA reconstruction at 314 the commercial and the library sidewalks and then the slurry seal and then the restriping on as part of this project and fortunately we are a contender for the small city aotment which is going to provide about $250,000 and if we win uh this particular bid you know we got about uh you know $250 $300,000 to be able to reallocate at another project but this is probably a project that we can get out um and actually installed and done before the end of July. Um, and so this might be the first project that we'll actually um see results on. Um, and so I'm kind of excited about that. Um, the other thing that's going on, Wasco Street at Main Intersection Improvements. It's a joint um, uh, project with a developer. And if you've noticed, Wasco's closed right there. I mean, it's in really bad shape. with some of the extra funding that is going to be available, we're going to be able to do an overlay um on that because that street's not going to be open and we're not going to have traffic, you know, go over that really rundown street. One

thing that we also have to keep in mind is that Wasco is for uh ready for a uh future capital improvement project probably about five or six years down the road where we're replacing the water line. So, we don't want to spend too much money. That's that's that's kind of always a juggle that I have to do is we have so much water line in town that we have to repair that I can't repair the roads and then repair the water line and then repair the road again. I got to try to fix everything. Um and that's a really delicate um uh thing to juggle. Um, so going on with that, East Hillrest overlay, that is a project um that I can probably add to an addendum to the Jesse Maze Perimeter project. Once you get a lot of projects together, you can bid them together and get a better price. And that is one of those projects that it doesn't say. It's already 100% designed, but once the Jesse May perimeter project gets bid, we can probably add that to that. And so that will come in probably next next week.

Uh public works building sign. I'm just waiting on the electrical work to be fixed on that one. Uh next, uh these are all pretty much the other things that are in design or just we're kind of at the beginning stages of of everything. Pacific Street Improvements, that is a big project. Um, and there are 29 properties where we have to go out of the right of way to actually make these projects. And so we have to get a firm, which I already got three quotes from uh from three different firms to be able to do these TCAAS, which means they're going to have a person going in there and uh uh uh not not argue, what's the word I'm looking for? negotiate terms with the residents um because we have to use um part of the you know their property that's outside of the rightway and that's not cheap and it's not quick and so that's going to probably push a Pacific project back just because you know it's those negotiations are not quick. Um so we can probably push that off to the next bianium potentially. Um, let me see. The pump station one upgrade. I have a lot of upgrades that I need to make to that pump station. And some of that is going to have to wait until we have our water master plant updated. Um, because we're looking at like water sources and can we reopen up the well there if we have an RC treatment plant. Uh, but that building is really run down. Um, there's a lot of security improvements that I need to make over there as well. Um, so there's there's just a lot of work that needs to be done there. Um, and so I'm only doing those in phases. Um, water seismic resiliency, that's that's another thing. We've got a pipeline, 16inch pipeline all the way to Hillsboro that's not seismically sound. And so that's one of the big reasons why we were looking at how we, you know, keep water in town or um have a

emergency source in town. And so this is one of those projects that is going to be very important here in the next uh upcoming budgets. um and how we deal with that. There's a lot of old infrastructure that if there is an earthquake or if there are some problems, we need to be able to uh to handle that, which also means we need to have the staff uh to be able to handle that when it happens. Um 313th of Avenue storm and flooding. Um so there's some flooding that goes on every single year. uh 313 near kind of North Avenue. And that's also one of those projects that 313th all the way down to Hillrest is going to have a new water line there and curb and gutter and everything like that, but there's flooding going on right now. So, I've got to be able to have a project that alleviates that before we have the bigger project. Um, and so that's one of those timing issues that that me and the engineering team have to work with. And now's the time to get that. And so we're trying to work with that. Um, as far as that, that's those are the major things that are going on this budget cycle, but I have to come up with the capital improvement plan. Um, and which we also have to update our TSP. There's a lot of things a lot of things in motion that I got to do um, between now and the next budget cycle. Um, but there's a lot of stuff that's going on in the future. And this isn't just this budget cycle. Just kind of keeping that in mind. Um, any questions about that before we go to Jesse Mays?

Yes.

And I'm not sure I'm not sure if it's a question about that per se, but let me frame this. Uh, I know a lot there's a lot of concern about uh data centers and other large industrial growth in Hillsboro uh possibly affecting water rates in Hillsboro. And since our water is coming from Hills to us, I'm wondering is is this a future concern? And you know, with all the stuff that you're doing, is there anything we can do to kind of uh mitigate there? I'll answer part of this and let Bill answer the other part. So, there's a lot of my master plans and the transportation system plan that have kind of in weird limbo. I can't update those until we figure out what's going on with our growth 20 years from now. Um, and so I'm in this weird spot where I can kind of make plans, but what's going to happen is if we don't grow, I'm going to have to slash a lot of capital improvement projects and focus on pavement management and water replacement and reconstruction is expensive. It's going to be very expensive. Um and so being able to have that uh the funding available in the water fund to be able to um replace and upsize uh these lines that are aging right now is going to become very important here within the next probably 5 to 10 years. Um, so, uh, the the the the water master plan, I really can't do a whole lot with that until we figure out what is our growth going to look like in the next 20 years because I can't plan, you know, just, you know, one, two years down the road on the water system and everything. I'm thinking about 20 I'm 50 years down the road. Um, so there's a lot that is at stake with the other discussion that we're going to have a couple of slides down, but some of it is going to be kind of more policy and everything. And I'll just kind of uh avoid all of that. And

if Bill has anything to add for the water rates here in the city, the city council proposes water rates and it's adopted at council. So the question as far as like if there's data centers in Hillsboro, uh is that going to impact us only if council decides to vote on raising the water rates? Am I correct, council? Uh Bill, will we buy water wholesale? I know we buy water wholesale but what we charge because the question was what we charge the residents actually what what the wholesale you want the wholesale cost. Okay.

Yeah. So um the big answer to the question on water only is that um I think you can expect the cost of water to go up every year no matter what. But you're hearing about increasing water costs and you're hearing about increasing power costs rapidly with data centers because both the current water system and the current power grid are at capacity. And so that additional big load of data centers is affecting two grids, water and power that are at capacity. on the water side. Luckily, the Wamut water supply is about to be turned on. That will be millions of gallons of water capacity that will be introduced to the system and the escalation in water costs from everything including data centers will be moderated because all of a sudden the water grid has been dramatically increased. Hasn't happened yet. Part of the reason why we now have to pay Northwest Natural to be our um help us yeah help us with our water system is because PBWD has shifted their staff over to getting ready for turning the switch on for everybody on water. Water's always going to go up, but when the Wano Valley water supply comes online, it will be less of an issue from any particular use, including data centers. PGE and the power grid is a different story. And you hear that in the news more. But on the water side of things with WMA Valley Water Supply coming online and just so you know, North Plains is when it does come online, North Plains will continue to get its water from uh from uh Egg Lake. We will not be getting water from the Wamut River. that's going to be going into other parts of Hillsboro, but North

Plains and the North Hillsboro industrial area all will still continue to be getting water from England.

Um, one thing to add to that with the water source studies and everything that we are doing, it's we are never going to be able to be in fully independent water supply like we um we just are not able to sustain that. So, anything that I do is going to be something that is more of like a backup, like in case like that main 16-inch line goes down, at least we have water in town to be able to kind of subsidize everything. So, um we are kind of past that point of being able to provide our full independence. So, we're going to have to work with um regionally um to kind of deal with this. Thank you. Can't believe this. Bill, you want to continue with Jesse Mace?

Well, the big question here is what's the best roof replacement choice from a cost perspective? So, Dustin, take it away.

Okay. When uh this was not something that would it was something that I was going to assess for the next budget cycle because I knew the roof was getting old. So, when we started having roof leaks happening last last winter, I was like, "Oh, that kind of pushes up the timeline a little bit. And when I got the first initial um estimates and everything, oh, this is going to be an easy 20 $25,000 job. You know, we can we can we can work with this. But as I got the quotes, it's kind of like one of those you peel back the layers. It's like you don't want to keep on peeling back those layers. Um because now we got to, you know, fix potential, you know, the rot and everything. The roof is in bad shape even though it's 22 years old. Um the roof is in in very bad shape. Um and so some of the all the the basically everybody was telling me that we need to get a new roof. We need to get new trim. We need to get new gutters. We need to get some of the stuff that's fixed up there and behind the wall and make sure that nothing is rotting in place. Um because this building is fairly old and we want to maintain it for as long as we can. We also have a uh we're thinking about upgrading like the AV system in the kitchen and it's like okay do we want to have a 25y year life cycle on this building or are we looking for a 50-year life cycle? Um and that's kind of where the discussion is going is you know I could spend 50,000 now for 25 years but then again that roof that we put in 22 years ago was supposed to be a 25 year roof and it's already done. Um or we could spend a little bit more for like a metal roof. Um metal roofs, that's what we have on all of our other buildings or most of our other buildings in town. And so we're thinking of longevity um for something like that. And so the big question here is with all the improvements that we're going to make to this facility, if we want to make it, you know, kind of a destination, I also

have something that's coming up next budget cycles like for security improvements for here. Um, and so if we're going to make all these upgrades, where do we want to spend that money on a short-term 50,000 or a long-term 80,000? And these are kind of the upper end um quotes for each. It doesn't mean that we're going to be spending much money, but those are kind of like where we're at right now. Um, for example, like the $80,000, I might get a bid for, you know, 60 65,000 for that 50 50 year roof. I don't know. Uh, but I do know right now the higher quote that I've got is right around that that area. So, this is kind of what I'm looking for. A little bit of guidance is are we looking for long-term or short term? And that's kind of where I'm at at this point. Commissioner Vantage.

So, my question is like you commented on as you're putting a new roof on. So, your quote or your estimate is 50,000 for just a roof, right? or is that considering when to tear? No, that's that's everything including interior. You have to replace the ceiling tiles. Yeah, that's everything that needs needs to be done. That's both exterior and interior and fixing any rot. Um that that includes the gutter, that includes the trim that goes underneath it. That includes all the apprentices that are like the fans and everything that's up there. If anybody has ever done construction, you know, once you open it up, you open up a whole other can of works. So your 50,000 project could end up being your $80,000 project. It could. Yeah.

Yeah. So, and then my next question then would be is do we want this building here for 25 years or is there potential that it would be replaced in Exactly. comments, questions. I was I was going to take out the donations for the $8,000 missionary. Oh my goodness.

Um I thank you. Okay, it's been a long time, but I just wanted to um just discuss, you know, and this might be more of a bill or Dustin question, but what is the feasibility of ever getting a grant or coming into a lottery windfall to replace this building and creating some sort of new community fall? Um, and the reason why I'm asking this is I'm balancing inflation and we know what costs 50,000 now could easily cost 70,000 in 25 years. Um, and again, no one has a crystal ball, but I'm I'm I'm just balancing like do we just bite the bullet now and spend 80,000 so that we have this building and maybe we have funding later on, but I'll pause there. Um, so I think we would need to look at this building sort of like looking at the current library annex civic center project. It would have to be some kind of combination of bond. you know, depending on what you redo this building with. Um, you know, you conceivably if if you did something that kind of was like an amenity of some kind besides just being a hall, you might be able to get away under current law with urban renewal money to pay for some of it maybe. And then you're looking at kind of a big ask for Oregon lottery dollars or something. I mean, it's it's kind of a big it's a big lift and it it um you know, we would have to really stitch together a few different sources. So, then my question and and food for thought for this board is to think through do we want a short-term fix for

a cheap price or do we want to invest in the longevity of this this building that's a huge historical asset for the town? Commissioner, um, where are these funds coming from, the 50 or 80,000 either? Yeah. Um, I think the easiest way to pay for it would be a use of the the general fund has $200,000 contingency in the budget, and we haven't touched the contingency um in in the budget, and that it could be used for that. That would be the easiest way to do it.

Okay.

Um I'm going to quote my father-in-law. Good ain't cheap. Cheap ain't good. Uh so when looking at this, I mean my personal feelings on it would be to one, we've already heard that there's $72,000 uh from the overage from the the library that could actually go into the general fund. So that could go right into the general fund and we could look at the $80,000 plan and knowing that there's a contingency, but we're also adding $72,000 back to that contingency. So it's actually $272,000. And so that could actually take this project and do something that's going to be here longer, better, and not, you know, like you said, we're battling inflation at that point. It's 80,000 now. It could be 120, 135,000 later. So those are just my personal opinions on it and open up to other comments and questions.

Yeah, Commissioner Murdo, more of just a quick question. How old is the building? Oh, I do not have the age for that. I'm sorry. Um early 1900s. I'm sorry. What? The age of older this building historian. You're the historian of the Bear with me a minute. I got to go back and think um Well, this is probably newer than the original school. Pardon? This is newer than the original school. So, uh, is that what you're looking at? No. If Bush Ko were here, he'd be able to tell you right on. Uh, okay. I have been here 47 years.

It was here at that time, and it was old at that time. Okay. Um, I am thinking, if I remember correctly, it's in the 60s, late 60s. 63. I may be wrong. Oh, you found it. Did you find it? But it looked faster than me, Lori. Well, that's what Now, wait a minute here because it was laid out in I feel like you guys have answered this before and it was like in the 30s or

Okay. So when the new when the new North Plains Elementary School was built, that's when the old school was torn down and this was preserved. And I believe it was late 60s. That's all I can say. Yes. Yeah. This is the only uh piece of the old school that that survived. And I recall in the 1915 for the school. Yeah. And this was the only this sorry 1960 this community center was originally built as the gymnasium if this is correct I fact

originally built as a gymnasium for the elementary school the school itself was constructed in 1915 on Hillrest Avenue where Jesse May's Park now stands 1950 but it was used for the school not as a commission weather. Yeah.

Uh, couple thoughts. Uh, I'm a fan of this building, uh, restoring it in some way if we can, doing it right. So, I would favor the better roof, but I also favor figuring out a way to do something inside. If we can't ever fix up the inside, then we've kind of wasted our money. We're in the process. Uh, I'm on the URA as the other counselors. We will probably know in the next couple months once we talk more with the expert in Uras whether we could access some of that money for a renovation of this. There are other examples. Cornelius has an old gymnasium. They're putting over a million dollars of URA money into a renovation. So perhaps that uh we'll know more in a couple months if that's feasible if the council favors it. Uh the other question I would ask of Bill, the parks foundation fund bill, is there any possibility of using any of the parks fund money for that since this is the parks building? Um the parks the the parks capital fund.

Yeah, that is where we keep system development charges and those can only used for new for facilities for growth. So, since this is an existing um building, if if you wanted to renovate this building and add square footage because we've gotten bigger, you could use the fund for the addition addition, but we can't use it to refurbish the existing building. I was just looking at that online and it looked like there was a couple grants and other things besides the SDC's that got put in there of a couple couple hundred thousand. I'm not sure what those

Yeah, I mean call, but if there's other money that was put in there, that's what I've heard, too. We can't use the SDC, but if there's other money that went in there from other sources, I would presume that potentially could be it. I mean, if if if there was money put in there for ex for um for kind of for refurbishment or re, you know, for of existing buildings, then, you know, we would need to very carefully earmark that. But really, the fund is for system development charges. And I'm not sure what the grants were. Oh, um I know what the grants were from. They were bricks for the veterans park and the veterans park was new and so that's why they were that money. That probably is what that money was.

Yeah, there is a section in there for the veterans park. Okay, quick idea. I I would like all of us to agree to make the recommendation to city council that they consider either uh some mix of a repair and or you know what alternative is you know uh tear down rebuild etc but or repair and uh improve if the in recommendation of council that they consider that as a a recommendation from this Sorry,

I see you turning your mic on. Thank you, Council Garde. Uh, just a quick point of clarification. Are you recommending the $50,000 25-year repair or the 50-year 80,000? I'm recommending that the city council look at this because that's this is in in their purview and make some kind of a a decision based on a recommendation. So we would have recommendation to look at all the alternatives and and come up with a plan for this building. Either tear it down, fix it up, uh fix up the cheap way or the expensive way. Whatever we decide, I'm all for it. But I would like to put it in front of the council to make more decisions about that. I believe we have to make a specific recommendation to the council to consider. Is that correct, Bill?

Um, yes. And one thing I would just remind folks about this building is that until we build a civic center, this is our place for public meetings, which means we needs a roof to protect up to $120,000 in AV equipment we need to buy and install so that we can have proper meetings and audio and recordings. Um, until we have a civic center, this is it. Commissioner,

I just want to push my thought from earlier. So, I was asking about the age because I would think that we would put the 80,000 into it. This really is aund what 10 111 year old building right now and it's historic part of a city that we should maintain it and then not in my purview probably not anybody here but shouldn't this be some kind of a historic monument or historic building for the city which I know opens up a lot of other things but that's just my thoughts on it

right so we do need to make a recommendation uh I'm hearing a lot more towards the 80,000. Am I hearing correctly? I just want to make sure I'm not misrepresenting anyone. Commissioner Vende, I would just like to make one more comment before we take final recommendations, but there are also seismic rehab grants and other grants available for roof replacements. So, I would like the city to look into some potential grants for roof replacement. Yeah. Seismic rehab grant program, SRGP. Yes, Commissioner Hurst.

Yes, there are a lot of grants out there. However, almost all of those grants have to be awarded before you can do any kind of fixing. It's not like you can fix it and then go get the money and get it. And I'm assuming that it needs to be done this summer. Yeah. Um and that's the only thing about grants. And once again, I'm going to walk back and talk about the fiscal strategy that this city has or has not. There is no fiscal strategy in place for these type of things. As you said, it's a 22-year roof. Would have gone in I three more years, 25 year roof.

I was looking at the roof replacement this budget cycle for future. Yes, absolutely. So, there's not not a plan. Um, and I'm concerned about that as a budget committee member because we're talking a budget and overall, Bill, correct me if I'm wrong, is it 13 million that the city has income revenue? Off the top of my head, 13 million total revenue. Um, no. 13 million is how much we're spending.

Okay. Okay. So, our revenue is is around there. Anyway, for a corporation that is this big to not have any kind of fiscal strategy moving forward, not even a five-year, let alone a 20-year is absolutely untenable. All right, let's, you know, for the sake of time, it's 8:02. I'm sure I've missed tucking my daughter in at this point, and I'm sure others have as well. Um, we do need to make a recommendation. Commissioner Hatcher, are you looking for a motion? Yes, please. Making decisions. Yeah,

I I think you can consensus this just kind of does anybody object to that idea rather than a vote. Does anyone object to recommending an $80,000 roof repair and doing this thing right and putting a good roof on this building that's been here for over however long? All right, it looks like there's consensus. Did we ask the two people online? Yes. Well, there's one person online. Uh, Commissioner Fry had to drop off earlier. Okay. Yes, I'm good with that.

Excellent. We have consensus. Let's move forward. $80,000 roof. Dustin, let's go get it. Um, so while this discussion happened, Lori looked up the tax records and according to the county, this building was constructed in 1927. So, we are upon a an anniversary next year and so we'll be back in 100year roof party. Let's Everybody scan the book. Can we do a roof party? that go.

So the last bit here and and I'm just yeah it is 804 but the last issue here is kind of more addressing the big picture. what kind of revenue, new revenues should be explored um to kind of address some of the things starting with very specifically potentially law enforcement service levels. But more broadly um we have the issue of um you know property tax revenue uh not being much and relatively speaking going down over time because we have a small levy um in the water fund picking up more and more of the tab every year. And I think it is my very you know narrow opinion but if that can be addressed if the solution to that occurs then you've kind of really solved the major problem um some fiscal sustain sustainability problem the city has. But anyway those are kind of the big questions. So um very quickly we kind of these are some slides towards the end that that uh city hall city hall city council viewed and we have had some new people on council since this

so this is some um some new in new information but the big questions like we talked about earlier. So there's process um regarding you know having different meetings and an outreach program and really kind of drumming up support for different things uh different options. the big options or a local option levy. Um maybe a water bill fee, maybe a combination. Um there's also the issue of hey everyone, we want to have a a fee on the water bill to help pay for parks and that alleviate that creates new room for the general fund to fund police more. So kind of, you know, moving things around differently rather than just, you know, um doing it more directly or however you want to do it. There's just different ways to do it. Um, and of course a fee on the water bill is going to have a city council driven process only with an ordinance. The local option levy is go out to voters and the voters have to approve it and that's every five years as well. So, but it does count against your federal federal taxes. Um, and then just a reminder about our tax rate. You know, again, um it seems property taxes in North Plains, maybe even fees or the third rail, but what can't be escaped is that North that even banks even banks in all of the, you know, all of that it does has recognized that we don't like property taxes. But they have moved forward and they have a property tax total property tax rate of $4.32 including a $2.35 local option levy that is specifically for paying for police. So you know I'm not encouraging you all to consider doing exactly what banks does. Um but the reality is that pretty much every other city but Gaston at least on this chart has recognized that Measure 50

uh eventually runs you into the ground as an agency and a local option levy um has been embraced by pretty much every other agency um including among just the ones we have listed here and it really should continue to be a strong part of an important part of what we discuss.

Thank you. I I I I hate to repeat what's been said in the room already, but um a fiscal strategy in combination with looking at funding sources and how we're going to fund the city, I think is a great combination. And if I was going to make a recommendation to city council is you can you can do both and have be very very effective for long term the next 5 10 20 years. uh a really, you know, well thoughtout fiscal strategy taking into into consideration growth options and, you know, or no growth options or what, wherever you stand. Having a fiscal strategy that supports that and then looking at, you know, funding for the city and all the services, etc. that the residents want, I think, is would be a great recommendation. I know it's more kind of pol on the verge of policy, but it seems like a great recommendation to the council is to take a, you know, take a wise look at both uh and uh build a plan, you know, based on kind of a long-term look.

Thank you, Bill. You have one more slide for us. just just to be aware of calendar. If ultimately a process leads to a preference to include a local option levy in the toolbox, so to speak, um there are just different deadlines for when um levy language has to be submitted um and approved um to make the ballots. But then there's also a different schedule um for when the money is received. So, at this point, if this if the city council decided that some kind of local option levy was appropriate and to put it on the ballot in November, we'd have till August to get it on the ballot, the language approved, and to get it on the ballot. The money wouldn't be received until actually um a fiscal year FY28, the way the calendar works. So whether it's this August or whether this February or excuse me uh February of 2027, if a local option letter went to the voters in either time, either election, we wouldn't receive until the following fiscal year. So we're kind of in the long wait period for funds at least from 11. Commissioner Hurst,

as I mentioned, I think it was September that I came before the city council and explained to them the calendar and if they wanted to do something along the line that the budget committee had recommended. Um, if I'm not mistaken, it was the first meeting in December where the city council would have to make a final decision in order to put the levy on the ballot um for May. So, we're talking now until the first part of December. So, um that's not a long time. I don't think it can be done in August because of the t it's the timing. um the city council would have to approve something the first week in first time in July in order for it to get on August.

Yeah. No, quick point. I guess what I would say is that whe you know because whether you you hurry and get it on the ballot for November by getting on the, you know, by filing in August. Yeah. Or whether you wait till February of next year, it's not showing up until November of 20. Right. So, or 2027, but fiscal year 20. Yeah, sweetie. Thank you. Uh, sounds like there's I'm going to just say sounds like there's consensus to go back to council and look at the options again. And I thank the council members that are in this room for being present and being part of this group tonight. Um, at this point, Bill, is there any closing remarks you have before we close out our meeting?

Um, I I don't believe so. I just appreciate everybody kind of um, if you have qu, you know, if you have questions, um, you know, let me know. Um, but no, appreciate the conversation. Yeah, and I'd echo that. Thank you everyone. We're all volunteers and budget committee is such a thrilling time, but great discussion tonight. Meetings are adjourned at 811.

I know. So, what time do we start? Uh, 610. Two hours.